Prosecuted for defamation for having denounced on the Say his name page the sexual assaults that comedian Alexandre Douville allegedly subjected him to, his alleged victim will be able to remain anonymous throughout the legal proceedings, ruled on Wednesday the Court of Appeal.
His name cannot therefore be mentioned in the media either.
This is another lawsuit involving the Say Her Name page, which describes itself as an anti-sexual misconduct movement publishing a list of “potential abusers”, both male and female. The denunciations made therein are anonymous.
The alleged victim, designated by initials in the judgment, first reported the attacks allegedly committed by the comedian. His denunciation was then transmitted by two other people to the Say his name page, which broadcast it in July 2020.
Alexandre Douville is suing all three for defamation for $120,000 for portraying him as a “sexual pervert”, a “harasser” and an “abuser”.
His alleged victim must therefore defend himself against this lawsuit. She therefore asked the court to withhold her name and any information allowing her to be identified.
Distress and media exposure
When the libel suit was filed, the name of the comedian’s alleged victim appeared in a number of newspaper articles. This media attention caused him new panic attacks – in addition to those caused by the assaults, which had also triggered depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts – , can we read in the judgment of the Court of call.
Media intervened to contest the request for anonymity, citing the public nature of the legal proceedings.
A first judge refused the whistleblower’s request. But the Court of Appeal finally acceded to his request, considering that “there is a public interest in the protection of his dignity” which must prevail here.
The dignity of a person can be affected when there is dissemination, for example, of aspects of his sexual life, explains the court. “The fact of coming to tell publicly, in order to defend himself, of the sexual acts that X alleges to have carried out under the threat and influence of the respondent (Douville), falls within the sphere of the intimate information mentioned in the Sherman judgment. This information lies at the heart of what is inherently of a private and intimate nature and therefore affects the fundamental identity of X.
The Court of Appeal therefore forbids mentioning the name of the alleged victim of Alexandre Douville.
She also specifies that the measure has little or no effect on the rights of the comedian: if the allegations against him prove to be unfounded, he will be able to clear his reputation, even if the public does not know the name of “X”.