One Year without Section 13 … and the sky has not fallen!
The “perfect storm” is here to rid Canada of censorship legislation
May 26, 2011: Exactly one year ago, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal issued two rulings (Henry Makow and Arthur Topham) which effectively stopped all enforcement of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Section 13 is Canada’s pernicious censorship law, which outlaws Internet postings by controversial writers, bloggers and internet commentators. Victims of Section 13 could be hit with fines up to $10,000 (to $30,000 for hurt feelings) and a lifetime gag order, which if violated could result in a prison sentence up to 5 years.
The landmark ruling of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal stopped all Section 13 cases until the final outcome in my case. Based on the fanatical rights enforcers at the Canadian Human Rights Commission – who have so far refused to accept any criticism of their activities – my case could well go on for many more years, until the Supreme Court of Canada can rule. Unfortunately, the CHRC has shown over and over again their willingness to throw as much tax-payers money as they can to keep their censorship franchise running.
Rumors have it that the Canadian Human Rights Commission screamed about how bad it would be if the Tribunal stopped enforcement of Section 13 and demanded that the Makow and Topham cases proceed regardless of the Lemire Tribunal decision, which found Section 13 to be unconstitutional. The Human Rights “chicken little’s” warned how the sky would fall if they could not harass and censor Canadians for daring to speak out.
To their credit, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal did the right thing after senior Tribunal member Hadjis found that Section 13 was unconstitutional. In the rulings issued by Tribunal member Edward Lustig he highlighted the comprehensiveness of the Hadjis ruling.
 On September 2, 2009 the Tribunal released its decision in the matter of Warman v. Lemire, 2009 CHRT 26. That case involved a complaint under s. 13 (1) of the CHRA. In his very comprehensive decision, Member Hadjis concluded:
"... I have also concluded that s. 13 (1) in conjunction with ss. 54 (1) and (1.1) are inconsistent with s. 2 (b) of the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. The restriction imposed by these provisions is not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter."
 I have reviewed the submissions of the parties and have concluded that it would be appropriate and would properly serve the interests of justice if this matter was adjourned. While the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled in Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, 1990 3 S.C.R. 892 that s. 13 (1) of the CHRA is constitutional, the application now before the Federal Court seeks to bring clarity to this issue in view of the distinct factual and legal context giving rise to this Tribunal's decision in Warman v. Lemire. Clearly Member Hadjis' decision goes beyond the consideration alone of the penalty provisions in s. 54 of the CHRA, as he chose not to "read out" the penalty provisions and preserve s. 13 of the CHRA. It is now up to the Federal Court to determine the operability of s. 13 of the CHRA. This will achieve the clarity that the Commission has indicated and that I agree is desirable in order to allow the Tribunal to be able to determine this and other cases brought under s. 13 of the CHRA.
 For these reasons I hereby adjourn these proceedings sine die pending the final outcome in the Warman v. Lemire case.
Paragraph 8 of the Lustig decision was a real dismissal of the CHRC’s “chicken little’s” claims in their appeal to the Federal Court of Canada in my case, where they claim that Hadjis should have just dropped the penalty provisions of Section 54 and keep Section 13 as constitutional legislation. As everyone knows who has read the Hadjis decision in my case, it was clear that he was finding that BOTH Section 13 (censorship provision) and Section 54 (fines and lifetime speech bans) were unconstitutional.
The Sky is Falling! The Sky is Falling!
After a year without the enforcement of Section 13, has the sky fallen as the rights enforcers claimed it would? Has a new Hitler seized control of Parliament? Is the “Nazi Party” on the verge of a “putsch” of Kanada? Are Jews and homosexuals being dragged out on Yonge Street in Toronto and beaten? Have the “Nazis” seized control of the entire Internet?
As crazy as this might seem, just have a look at the joint legal submissions of the Canadian Jewish Congress, League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith and the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in my case. These self-proclaimed “spokesthingys” of the Canadian Jewish community, have claimed that Section 13 is desperately needed for the “physical and psychological security” of “the Canadian Jewish community”.
The “physical” security of the “Canadian Jewish Community”??? So, after a year without the “physical and psychological security” is the Canadian Jewish Community on the verge of being harrassed and dehumanized? Uh no. no. no. no. no. no. and no.
Ezra Levant wrote in 2008 that “I didn't know that I [as a Jewish Canadian] was supposed to be a caricature of a thin-skinned Jew, a neurotic Woody Allen stereotype, a perpetual victim. … There is one useful element to their psychobabble dressed up as a legal brief. It is proof, in their own writing, that section 13 is being abused in ways that were never contemplated -- let alone permitted -- by our Supreme Court when they last assessed section 13 in 1990. To protect Jewish "psychological security"? So that's all it takes to trump our fundamental freedom of speech, as enshrined in the Charter of Rights, Bill of Rights, and 800 years of common law?”
“Physical Security” Hey we need speech laws! Oh Actual violence? We have nothing to say
The Canadian Jewish Congress wants to limit freedom of speech, using the draconian Section 13 of the Canadian Human Right Act to make sure the “Canadian Jewish community” is protected from “hate speech” which will ensure that “as a last resort that harmful speech does not progress into violence.”
YET. When anti-Semitic violence is actually done towards Canadian Jews by radical Muslims. The Canadian Jewish Congress is almost silent.
Think about this:
The Canadian Jewish Congress is spending tens of thousands to oppose freedom of speech and uphold Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which has lead to the censorship of such “anti-Semitic” publications as the Western Standard, Macleans and Catholic Insight. … YET they are not going to spend any time or resources tracking down or exposing the Muslim extremists who attacked a Jew and supporter of Israel with a machete in Ottawa last year. Is it possible the Ceej is a bit out of touch with reality? [hmm. Yes!]
Oh and not surprisingly… not a single word in the entire Canadian Jewish Congress’s submissions were about radical Muslim haters such as Al-Hayiti, I guess it is not hate (if you’re Muslim that is) to write that Gays should be "beheaded", and that Jews "spread corruption".
The “Perfect Storm” to blow away Section 13!
The Lemire case has finally been scheduled to be heard at the Federal Court of Canada in December, 2011. Unfortunately, the entire weight of removing Section 13 is now completely on my shoulders.
Every Section 13 case before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has been stopped pending my case. Other cases at the Federal Court of Canada have also been stopped pending the final disposition in my case. Several “cease and desist” (permanent life-time speech bans) orders issued by the Tribunal have also been put on hold until my case is over. This is certainly a lot of pressure, but I am up for it! It will be a cold day in hell when I will bow down and kiss the feet of these bastard censors.
Also it seems doubtful that a political solution will come about either. The Conservative government has been very quiet about Section 13, even tho many individual MPs have spoken out, and even the Conservatives Policy Convention voted overwhelmingly to remove Section 13 (Resolution P-203). Stephen Harper seems to be looking at increasing censorship on the Internet.
Thankfully a set of events have come together to make the “perfect storm” against this censorship legislation.
Firstly and most importantly, I am the only Canadian in the 35+ year history of the Canadian Human Rights Act to ever win a case before the Tribunal. This was HUGE. To be able to win in a “kangaroo court” – setup by the censors themselves – is as decisive as any court victory could possibly be. This means the onus is on the CHRC to overturn the ruling, and the wind is at our back. (Talk about a perverse Alice-in-Wonderland system. At the Federal Court, I will be defending the Tribunal, while the CHRC will be slamming them)
Secondly, many Canadians not realize the true threat that the Canadian Human Rights Act poses and under no circumstances can it be properly administered. From mainstream books like “Shakedown” to hundreds of articles denouncing Section 13 in the press, a climate has been fostered which will not only allow Section 13 to fall, but will welcome it with open arms. Dozens of politicians have spoken out against Section 13, the Conservative Party convention voted 98% in favor of removing Section 13 and even bills have were introduced in Parliament to strike down the section [See M-446]. The Act has to be wiped from Canadian laws books.
Thirdly, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has stopped all enforcement of Section 13, which in essence means the law has no force or effect. By the time my hearing actually gets to court in December 2011, Section 13 will not have been enforced for over a year and a half. To be constitutional under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 13 has to pass the proportionality test. This test looks at the “pressing and substantial” nature of the law. As each day passes with Section not being enforced by the Tribunal, how could anyone logically argue that Section 13 censorship is desperately needed in Canada? Each day that passes with Section 13 not being enforced, is one day closer to the law being wiped off the legal books of Canada.
Fourthly, the Attorney General of Canada has outright refused to stand by this law at the Federal Court of Canada. The Attorney General of Canada (AG) played a key role in my Tribunal hearing, and they attended every single day of the hearing. They made many submissions and strenuously argued in favor of keeping Section 13. But after the Tribunal threw out Section 13, the AG accepted the decision and no longer would defend the law. An Access to Information request filed by myself in 2009 showed that upwards of 30 lawyers and others at the Dept. of Justice reviewed every aspect of my case, and specifically chose to accept the Tribunals ruling. This is a huge signal to the Federal Court justices who will eventually hear my case. This is Federal legislation and not even the Federal Attorney General (who is tasked with enforcing all laws in Canada) wants to defend it.
Fifthly, several high profile civil liberties organizations have intervened in my case. Both the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the BC Civil Liberties Association have intervened in my case and submitted very good legal arguments in favor of striking down Section 13. These two organizations join the Canadian Free Speech League and the Canadian Association for Free Expression, who also intervened in my case while it was at the Tribunal level. The inclusion of these civil liberties associations send a clean signal to the Federal Court that my case has far reaching implications and that freedom of speech is being infringed.
And lastly, even before I have set a single foot in court, I have won half the case. The Canadian Human Rights Commission has conceded that the penalty provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act (which allows heavy fines) is unconstitutional. The CHRC was fanatic at the Tribunal to keep Section 54 (fines) but after the Hadjis ruling which found Section 54 was unconstitutional, the CHRC was forced to concede that ... yes indeed it was. This means that of my constitutional challenge against Section 13 and 54, I have won half of it already, since no matter what happens, the penalty provisions of Section 54 will be struck down. It brings a smile to my face when I read these anonymous hate-bloggers who pound away at their keyboards that I have “no chance” in ever winning. While they spread their filth and lies, I sat quietly and worked away in the background and have already won half my case.
My Kick-Ass Lawyer – Barbara Kulaszka
Above all else, the real “perfect storm” against Section 13 is my courageous lawyer – Barbara Kulaszka. Her in-depth knowledge of this law and never back down style has singlehandedly taken down Section 13. Barbara’s legal submissions were clear, concise and brilliantly written. She is the only lawyer to ever win a Section 13 case in the 35 year history of this law. That really is an amazing accomplishment! And she didn’t win in front of some impartial jury of her peers – no – she won in a place setup by censors, for censors and staffed by censors, who must have an “interest in, and sensitivity to, human rights”.
Barbara Kulaszka is one hell of a lawyer and very well respected by her peers. Thanks to her work, Section 13 is on the verge of being thrown out. She is one person that really deserves the Order of Canada, to recognize her significant achievements and remarkable service on behalf of all freedom minded Canadians.
To keep up to date, please bookmark my website, which will has updates on Section 13 censorship, freedom and my case. The URL is http://www.freedomsite.org
Human Rights Activist
May 26, 2011
Further reading on Section 13:
· Part #1: SECTION 13: A Sword not a Shield! The Aggressive Nature of Internet Censorship
Fighting the fanatics at the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission and defending freedom of speech for ALL Canadians is not an easy task. In particular, the Federal Court of Canada challenge to defeat Canada’s internet censorship legislation, has consumed an immense amount of time and resources. This has meant sacrificing a lot of cherished things in my life that I used to take for granted such as spending precious time with my wonderful children. It's also very costly and has incurred heavy debts given that I'm facing a "Human Rights" juggernaut that has a limitless budget. It has already spent millions and is prepared to spend a lot more of your tax dollars to keep their thought control machine running.
My courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka and myself have demonstrated what two dedicated researchers can accomplish against overwhelming odds. We have single-handedly and doggedly fought the system and exposed the corrupt underbelly of the "Human Rights" Commission's fanatics. Nothing ever comes easy when you are fighting such a racket. This case is a seminal one, where the outcome will have serious implications on our right to think and speak freely in this country for generations to come. All Canadians will benefit if we manage to get this shameful law expunged from our legal books.
Every victory we've attained against the "Human Rights" juggernaut has come at great expense. Nothing has come easy. In fact, the “Human Rights” Commission has done everything in their power to stop exposure of their twisted censorship agenda.
I cannot carry on this important fight alone. Your donations literally equal the survival of this case. I wish to thank all those that have donated to this worthy cause. Please donate directly to us so that I can send out a personal thank you. If you have donated to another organization or individual please contact me so I can thank you directly and send you a copy of our special booklet that is for our supporters only.
Send your donation to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Send your donation to: email@example.com
Support Marc Lemire's Constitutional Challenge
Be part of our team and contribute what you can to defeat this horrible law
and protect Freedom of Speech in