Law Against Hatred in Canada

Canada does not have free speech.

Canadian law:

Marginal note:Wilful promotion of hatred

(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of

• (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

• (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Marginal note:Wilful promotion of antisemitism

(2.1) Everyone who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes antisemitism by condoning, denying or downplaying the Holocaust

• (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

• (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Marginal note:Defences

(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)

• (a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;

• (b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;

• (c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or

• (d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.

Marginal note:Defences — subsection (2.1)

(3.1) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2.1)

• (a) if they establish that the statements communicated were true;

• (b) if, in good faith, they expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;

• (c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds they believed them to be true; or

• (d) if, in good faith, they intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of antisemitism toward Jews.

I wonder if Salmon Rushdie might have violated this. I certainly do not agree with him being stabbed, or the fatwa against him. But he started it all by writing a book saying that the Koran was the work of the Devil, and his novel did appear to incite hatred against Islam. Maybe it would qualify as a good faith opinion about a religious text, except that he wrote it as a novel and I doubt that he even believes in the Devil.

These laws make it a lot more difficult to get the truth about the Jewish Holocaust. No one wants to risk two years in jail, just to point out that someone else is wrong.