(Ottawa) Government officials say online hate speech would have to portray a group as ‘inherently violent’ or ‘inhumane’ to meet the threshold for investigation by a human rights tribunal under a new law proposed.
Justice officials briefed reporters Wednesday on the Criminal Code provisions contained in the government’s new bill to combat online harm, known as Bill C-63.
The changes have faced sharp criticism from civil liberties groups and legal experts who express concerns about potentially curbing free speech.
They also come after the Liberals received significant criticism – particularly from opposition Conservatives – over other laws aimed at regulating tech giants for their streaming platforms and their use of news content.
Bill C-63, also known as Online Harms Act, aims to introduce tougher penalties for existing offenses. It would allow sentences of up to five years in prison for hate propaganda, compared to two years currently. It would also allow a judge to impose life imprisonment for anyone who advocated genocide.
Such measures are “draconian,” the Canadian Civil Liberties Association warned, adding that they could stifle public discourse, including by “criminalizing political activism.”
Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia at the center of the debates
The legislation comes amid a debate, sparked by the war between Israel and Hamas, over what constitutes hate speech versus free speech and what should be considered the threshold for to incitement to genocide.
Hamas militants killed 1,200 people and took 250 others hostage during an attack in southern Israel on October 7. Israel retaliated in a war that has killed more than 30,000 Palestinians, according to officials in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.
Amid widespread protests in Canada and abroad, advocates have sounded the alarm over hate-motivated attacks against Jews and Muslims.
Jewish advocacy groups called for more police intervention, saying protesters engaged in anti-Semitic and hateful behavior.
Pro-Palestinian protesters, meanwhile, said they felt vilified and Muslim organizations raised concerns that people were being censored for their comments about the war.
Justice officials, who spoke to reporters on condition that they not be named, stressed that a high threshold would have to be met for a court to convict someone of advocating genocide.
Not only must a provincial attorney general approve such a charge, but a judge must also be satisfied that an individual “directly seeks to incite or provoke others to commit genocide.”
A slogan heard at some protests since the war – “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” – has been at the center of the debate over the limit on hate speech.
Some Jewish groups said it called for the destruction of Israel, located between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, and should therefore be considered hate speech or a call for genocide.
Palestinian protesters and other supporters said it was simply a call for freedom and equality.
Last fall, a man whose lawyer said he chanted the phrase was charged in Calgary with hate disorder. The charge was eventually stayed.
Redefining hate speech
The main aim of the Liberal government’s bill is to combat online hate by introducing a new regulator for social media companies.
But he also proposes to reintroduce an article of the Canadian Human Rights Act which would allow people to file complaints against those who post hate speech online.
Officials said the bill includes an improved version of language that was removed under the former Conservative government of Stephen Harper.
Known as Article 13, the original version had sparked concerns from critics, including Conservative MPs, about its potential impact on the right to free speech.
It defines hate speech as anything “likely to expose one or more people to hatred or contempt” on the basis of their race, gender, religion or any other prohibited grounds of discrimination.
Both in its human rights legislation and in the Criminal Code, the government now seeks to define hate speech as “content that expresses hatred or defamation.”
Under the proposed law, an individual or group could file a complaint about hate speech online with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
Officials said the commission would review unfounded complaints and refer legitimate complaints to a court.
Remedial measures could include ordering the offender to remove their post or paying the victim up to $20,000 in damages, with a fine rising to $50,000 if they refuse to comply. comply with the sanctions, ministry officials said.
Speech considered actionable includes anything that “depicts groups as inherently violent, inhumane and deserving of execution or banishment,” one official said.
This does not include content that criticizes or demeans a group and violates their dignity through jokes, mockery or insults. Content that advocates for the suppression of the rights of a group would also not meet the criteria of “hate or defamation”, detailed the official.