Nostalgia Is Great

The current Canadian law concerning anti-hate speech contains two sections. The first section, 319 (2), states that everyone who willfully promotes hatred, other than in private conversation, against any identifiable group (which is defined under 318 (4) as “colour, race, religion, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation”) is entitled to imprisonment or is denied the right to a jury trial. The second section, 319 (3), states defences for (2): no one can be convicted of an offence under 319 (2) if the individual establishes that the statements were true, if they attempted to establish an argument based on a religious opinion, if the statements were for public benefit, or if they intended to point out matters producing feelings of hatred towards an identifiable group in Canada, for the purpose of removal.

The public incitement of hatred law 319 (1) states that everyone who communicates hateful statements against any identifiable group that leads to a breach of the peace is also entitled to imprisonment or is denied the right to a jury trial. This law is different from 319 (2) because the latter is willfully promoting hatred, whereas 319 (1) is simply publicly inciting hatred.

James Keegstra was a high school teacher in Eckville, Alberta whom willfully communicated anti-Semitic statements to his students regarding Jewish people. In 1984 he was charged under 319 (2). However, he applied for an appeal and claimed that said section infringed upon his freedom of expression, as expressed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. His principal argument was that section 2(b) of the Charter was violated, which states, “Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of...

... middle of paper ...

...speech. This law need not exclude private conversations from being punishable as an indictable offence because there is still harm being done, and excluding said conversations from this law enables hate speech to continue. If psychological and emotional harm is executed from allowing freedom of speech (section 2(b) from the Charter) to occur, it does not assist in developing a moral and just society. The section should read as follows:

319. (2) Everyone who, by communicating statements in any given situation 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.

The modification of this law will dismiss the ambiguity of private conversations, and make it also consistent with section 318 (1) involving genocide.