Freedom of expression in Canada is protected as a "fundamental freedom" by Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (enacted 1982); however, in practice the Charter permits the government to enforce "reasonable" limits censoring speech. Hate speech, obscenity, and defamation are common categories of restricted speech in Canada.
Legislation Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms establishes the right to freedom of expression, and the Supreme Court of Canada has interpreted this right in a very broad fashion. The Court has said that any act that is intended to convey a message is protected under section 2(a) but that this does not include acts that have a violent form. However, section 1 of the Charter establishes that "reasonable" limits can be placed on the right if those limits are prescribed by law and can be "demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society".
Reasonable limits
Freedom of expression in Canada is not absolute; section 1 of the Charter allows the government to pass laws that limit free expression so long as the limits are "reasonable and can be justified in a free and democratic society"."Freedom of Expression" , Centre for Constitutional Studies, University of Alberta. Retrieved 14 May 2020. Hate speech (which refers to the advocacy and incitement of genocide or violence against a particular defined racial, ethnic, gender, sexual, religious or other identifiable group), and obscenity (a broad term referring to, among other things, literature that is unreasonable, dangerous or intensely inappropriate to society at large, such as child sexual abuse material or fraudulent medication intended to promote sexual virility), are two examples that gain significant attention from the media and in public discourse.
In the province of Quebec, freedom of expression is restricted in the interest of protecting the French language. Outdoor commercial signage may only use English text if it is half the size of the French text under the Charter of the French language, or businesses can face financial penalties. The Supreme Court ruled the signage regulation a "reasonable" limit on the freedom of expression.
Canadian libel and defamation law
Libel involves publication in some permanent form such as writing in a book or newspaper.Flaherty, Gerald A. Defamation Law in Canada. Ottawa, Ont.: Canadian Bar Foundation, 1984. Defamation is a tort that gives a person the right to recover damages for injury due to publication of words that were intended to lower a person's character.Richard, John D., and Stuart M. Robertson. The Charter and the Media. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Bar Foundation, 1985. The law encourages the media to publish with caution, to avoid any forms of libel and to respect a person's freedom of expression.
"Defamatory libel" is a criminal offence under the Criminal Code. Subsection 298(1) defines defamatory libel as "a matter published, without lawful justification or excuse, that is likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that is designed to insult the person of or concerning whom it is published." Section 300 prohibits the publication of defamatory libels that the publisher "knows is false." Section 301 prohibits the publication of any defamatory libel, but this section has been found unconstitutional as it could criminalize the publication of matters that are true.
For example, James Keegstra, an antisemite who taught Holocaust denial to schoolchildren in Alberta, was convicted and prosecuted for hate speech in 1984.MacKinnon, Catharine A. Only Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1993.
Censorship of media
In the 1970s, the Canadian national security apparatus abused its surveillance powers to illegally suppress left-leaning press outlets through arson, breaking and entering, and theft.
Censorship redefines the idea of freedom of speech as a public right rather than a private one. Senator Keith Davey supported this view in 1981, writing in The Globe and Mail: "Too many publishers harbour the absurd notion that freedom of the press is something they own...of course the exact opposite is the case. Press freedom is the right of the people."Senator D. Keith Davey, "How Misreading Jolted the Press", The Globe and Mail, September 16, 1981.
The emergence of the internet as a major site of media distribution opened up a new avenue for state censorship; especially as Canadians are heavy users of the internet. In 2007, the Associate Deputy Minister of National Defence under Prime Minister Stephen Harper asserted in Parliament that the Canadian government was working with the American National Security Agency (NSA) and other such agencies to "master the internet". In such an effort, Canada's government has participated in the securitization of the internet. "Securitization" is a phenomenon wherein threats to state power are characterized as threats to "the people", legitimating otherwise impermissible acts in the name of protecting the security of the nation.
Internet censorship may also be undertaken by the corporations that control access—Internet service providers (ISPs). In 2005, a major Canadian ISP, Telus, blocked access to a website set up to publicize the views of a labour union in conflict with the company. The Canadian Telecommunications Act prohibits carriers controlling the content they carry for the public; however Telus argued that it acted within the law, citing its contractual power to block certain sites. The block incidentally affected hundreds of unrelated websites and was removed after attracting public criticism.
Compared to the United States, Canada's regulatory environment is markedly protective of net neutrality. This is credited to the country's regulatory structure, existing laws, bipartisan agreement on the issue, and the uncompetitive nature of the Canadian telecom market, which necessitates tight regulation to avoid abuses.
Front de libération du Québec crisis After the Front de libération du Québec (FLQ) crisis, many attacks were made against the press, suggesting that the media were irresponsible in the way they elaborated rumours during a time of crisis.Cohen-Almagor, Raphael. The Scope of Tolerance : Studies on the Costs of Free Expression and Freedom of the Press. London: Routledge, 2006. Criticism reached such highs that after Pierre Laporte’s death on October 17, 1970, the Liberal Party whip, Louis-Philippe Lacroix accused the journalists of being responsible for the death. Secretary of State Pelletier and the Chairman of the Canadian Radio-Television Commission (CRTC) discussed ways of achieving restraint regulations but concluded it would lead to accusations of censorship. The War Measures Act was invoked and CBC news reports in Ottawa received instructions that they were to broadcast only stories that were attributed to an identifiable source, retrain comments from the opposition parties, and to not allow their names to be identified with political statements. It was decided that the Secretary of State should see that private and public sectors of the media were accepting the government decisions. Program Secretary to the Prime Minister, J. Davey, thought the government should concentrate on four areas—one being for the Strategic Operations Centre to continue monitoring the media from week to week.Minutes of the Cabinet Committee on Security and Intelligence (6 November 1970) (classified "Secret").
Associations and controls
Communications control institutions are governmental agencies that regulate, may change the media, regulations, and new regulatory bodies. In 1982, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau said: "When the media do not discipline themselves, the state steps in".Singer, Benjamin D. Communications in Canadian Society. Don Mills, Ontario: Addison-Wesley, 1983. There are some inter-media control institutions that regulate themselves to avoid being regulated by the government such as: The Canadian Association of Broadcasters, the Ontario Press Council, publishers associations, and advertising groups.
National Media associations, many newspapers, magazines, and major retail chains have supported the Canadian Code of Advertising Standards. The Canadian Radio-Television Telecommunication Commission (CRTC), must approve all scripts for broadcasting advertisements of food, drugs, and cosmetic products over Canadian stations. In Ontario, the Liquor License Board, under the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations, publishes a book listing what can and cannot be published in print and what can be broadcast in advertising for wine, beer, and cider products. All commercials that are intended for children under 12 years of age must follow the Broadcast Code for Advertising to Children and is managed by the Children's Committee of the Advertising Standards Council.
Ontario, British Columbia, and Alberta regulate the use of the title "engineer" and impose penalties of up to $10,000 for a first offence and $25,000 thereafter on the use of the title or related language or seals by those not accredited by the relevant provincial engineering society, regardless of qualification."Section 40.(1): Offence, practice of professional engineering", Professional Engineers Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P.28., Ontario e-Laws. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
Books
What can and cannot be published in books raises questions of free speech and tolerance. In 1962, D.H Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover faced a court decision questioning if it should be banned. The case challenged the federal government's obscenity laws under the criminal code. The book frequently used the word ‘fuck’ and used detailed descriptions of adultery which insulted some readers.Warburton, Nigel. Free Speech: a Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. The argument was made that the book was obscene, faced issues with obscenity and would corrupt and degrade readers. The rules on censorship by the federal government were not clear and in 1962, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the book could continue to be published and found Lady Chatterley’s Lover not obscene.
Mark Steyn’s 2006 book about the Muslim Diaspora in the West, America Alone, was the subject of a complaint from Mohamed Elmasry, head of the Canadian Islamic Congress, stating that the article "discriminates against Muslims on the basis of their religion. It exposes Muslims to hatred and contempt due to their religion". The complaint against Steyn and Maclean's magazine, which excerpted the book when it was published in 2006, was heard before three human rights commissions: Ontario's, which declared it lacked jurisdiction;"Commission statement concerning issues raised by complaints against Maclean's Magazine, Ontario Human rights Commission, 9 April 2008. British Columbia's, which dismissed the complaint;Macdonald, Neil. "Free Speech, Eh? Why Is Canada Prosecuting Mark Steyn?". CBC News. 13 June 2008. and the Canadian Human Rights Commission, which dismissed the federal complaint without referring the matter to a tribunal."Reasonable limits on the expression of hatred: Mark Steyn and the Canadian Human Rights Commissions", Matthew Omolesky, in Democratiya 16 (Spring/Summer 2009). This case has been cited as a motivating factor in the repeal of section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, legislation that permitted federal human-rights complaints regarding "the communication of hate messages by telephone or on the Internet"."Good riddance to Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act" , Jonathan Kay, National Post, 7 June 2012.
Television
By the early 1990s, Canada was the second largest exporter of audiovisual products after the United States. The Canadian Statute of 1968 added to the obligations of broadcasters that Canadian broadcasting should promote national unity, and that broadcasters must obey the laws respecting libel, obscenity, etc.