(Ottawa) Federal Justice Minister Arif Virani believes that safeguards in his bill aimed at countering online hatred will prevent the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) from being overwhelmed by a mountain of complaints from citizens who do not agree on what constitutes hateful content.
The legislative document, C-63, plans to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to define publishing hate speech as discrimination. If the bill is adopted in its current form, people who feel they are victims of online hatred will have to file a complaint with the CHRC in the hope that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal will rule in their favor.
The sections of C-63 on this subject revisit a legislative provision that was deleted by the former Conservative government of Stephen Harper.
“What we heard is that, at the time, when it existed, […] they said that, yes, there were a lot of complaints and it was difficult to manage all the complaints,” said Minister Virani about the CHRC, during a recent interview with The Canadian Press.
He assured that Justin Trudeau’s government has adjusted the situation with its bill. “We listened to that and implemented improvements,” he maintained.
Among the adjustments he listed, Mr. Virani affirmed that the definition of hateful content enshrined in C-63 is “completely clear” and “linked to case law,” mentioning that it has been used by the Supreme Court since 2013 .
The bill establishes that “content promoting hatred” is that which “expresses hatred towards or defames an individual or group of individuals and which, given the context in which it is communicated, is likely to foment hatred or defamation of an individual or a group of individuals on the basis of such a prohibited ground of distinction,” we can read.
It is specified that content cannot be considered hateful “for the sole reason that it expresses disdain or aversion or that it discredits, humiliates, harms or offends”.
It was also because of similar concerns that the former Harper government eliminated what was formerly section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Convinced that his overhaul of old legislative provisions does not infringe on freedom of expression, Mr. Virani has, since the end of February, been increasing his number of outings to emphasize what the bill, in his opinion, does not contain. This could suggest that he spends less time emphasizing what C-63 includes.
“It was necessary, for me, to explain […] on several occasions what we are not doing just to emphasize that it is a fairly measured approach, quite appropriate, quite linked to our own rights here in Canada and our protections which are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” he summarized during the telephone interview.
The minister added that the chosen definition “is not mine, that of Justin Trudeau or of our Liberal cabinet,” repeating that it comes from the highest court in the country.
Mr. Virani maintains that the CHRC will be able to “summarily reject” complaints “from the start of the process if what is the subject of the complaint does not touch the definition of hatred”.
The minister also pointed to a provision giving the commission the latitude to dismiss a complaint because the report is deemed “futile, vexatious or tainted in bad faith”.
Furthermore, costs may be demanded “against a person who has abused the commission process,” the minister noted.
Mr. Virani said he was receptive to any request for additional resources that the CHRC could make.
Bill C-63 has, since its tabling, barely progressed through its study by parliamentarians. Mr. Virani blames the conservatives, whom he accuses of blocking the progress of the legislative study.
On this subject, a spokesperson for the Conservative leader declared last week that the agreement the Liberals have with the New Democrats allows them to prioritize or thwart any legislation as they want, “contrary to their whining.”
The parliamentary leader of the New Democrats, Peter Julian, for his part believes that any delay is attributable to Justin Trudeau.
The Bloc Québécois requested in vain that the bill be split so that other sections of the legislative proposal aimed at protecting minors from online sexual exploitation be adopted quickly since, according to the political party, these elements are in consensus , unlike those relating to hateful publications.
