In his judgment explaining why he considers that recourse to the Emergencies Act was relevant to end the occupation of Freedom Convoy in Ottawa in February 2022, Judge Rouleau, President of the Commission on the state of emergency, concluded last Friday that the demands of the protesting groups were “shaped by an online landscape completely riddled with disinformation”.
At the same time, a survey carried out by a hundred journalists revealed last week how “influence agencies” manipulated public opinion by intervening in 33 electoral campaigns, all over the world. At the same time, we learn that the Chinese government allegedly sponsored a disinformation campaign in Canada during the 2021 federal election “to elect a minority Liberal government and sideline certain Conservative candidates”.
The news reminds us to what extent access to diversified and reliable sources of information is an indicator of democratic health. What are elections, referendums or other democratic processes worth in contexts of strong misinformation? How can a population form an opinion, hold the government to account and participate in public debate to find the best solutions to real problems?
Earlier this month, The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) published its Democracy Index 2022, which presents comparative data on the state of democracy in several countries. The indicators measure the holding of free and plural elections, the proper functioning of government institutions, political participation and culture, and the protection of civil liberties.
For 2022, Canada ranks 12e rank of “entire democracies”. From a score of 9.24 in 2020, Canada fell to 8.88 in 2022. The decrease in the 2022 score is linked to civil liberties, in particular violated by the use of “emergency measures”.
Canada would therefore have had a better score without recourse to the Emergencies Act, which, however, has just been deemed appropriate by Judge Rouleau. “The right to protest helps keep Canada safe, but the situation Canada experienced in February 2022 was not a peaceful and lawful protest,” he said. The invocation threshold is when order breaks down and freedom cannot be secured or is seriously threatened. In my view, that threshold has been met in this case. »
I don’t know if the EIU would revise their score if they learned of this judgment. Either way, Canada still scores one of the highest scores in the world for political participation. But for how long ? Are we doing enough collectively to promote sound practices of information and social dialogue? Are we skilled enough to listen to opinions that may seem marginal or irreconcilable and encourage membership in this democratic society, through dialogue?
Access to diversified and quality information, public confidence in the relevance of our public institutions (including the justice system and the electoral process) will be determining factors for social cohesion and political participation in the coming years.
While examples of misinformation abound, we still have the choice to act with individuals by stimulating informed citizenship and creating spaces for inclusive dialogue, while adopting better public policies to control algorithms and online platforms. To this end, let us remember the conclusions of the Canadian Commission on Democratic Expression in which the Institut du Nouveau Monde participated in 2021.
After nine months of study and deliberation, the six recommendations propose a regulatory framework and independent mechanisms to regulate online platforms and discourse. They provide a practical blueprint for citizens and governments to address the issue of harmful speech in the Canadian context. The solutions are known, let’s apply them courageously!