Since the end of April, many people, community organizations, unions, researchers, columnists and media representatives have raised red flags in the face of the threats posed by Bill no 57 (PL57) filed on April 10 by the Minister of Municipal Affairs, Andrée Laforest.
This includes 329 organizations signatories to the declaration “PL57 – A setback for rights and freedoms” launched at the beginning of May. Coming from almost everywhere in Quebec, these organizations work in various sectors such as health, housing, disability, education, labor relations, the environment, collective defense of rights, etc.
Legitimate and serious are the concerns regarding this bill, Chapter I of which provides for the adoption of the “Law aimed at protecting elected officials and promoting the unhindered exercise of their functions”, which presents serious risks of attacks on freedoms of expression, opinion and association.
With PL57, citizens risk seeing their rights and freedoms violated for political actions that involve democratic participation and social protest. This is a real threat in a democratic society that is just, inclusive and respectful of human rights.
Elected officials are right to be concerned about situations of harassment, intimidation and violence. Among elected officials, it is mainly women and people from minorities who experience this type of situation, both from citizens and other elected officials. The problem is serious and deserves careful attention to find the right solutions that will improve the situation.
Let us explain to you how PL57 is greatly problematic and completely misses the target of protecting elected officials, while endangering freedom of expression.
The new law proposes a regime of injunctions for “words or gestures which unduly hinder the exercise of functions [d’un député ou d’un élu municipal] or violate their right to privacy”, as well as criminal prosecution for anyone “causing disorder in such a way as to disrupt the proceedings” of a municipal council (fines of $50 to $500). The articles in question do not mention harassment, intimidation or threats, which are the problems the bill aims to address.
The overly broad notion of “undue obstruction” does not distinguish between, on the one hand, proven threats against elected persons and, on the other hand, democratic participation, citizen political action and social protest. We can think, for example, of the occupation of elected officials’ offices, the collective expression of discontent during a municipal council by unfurling a banner and shouting a few slogans, or the disruption of a public event. ‘an elected.
These forms of political action are at the heart of a democratic society based on social justice and the defense of human rights.
In the context of limiting social protest that we are currently observing, there is a fear that PL57 will be applied in an abusive and arbitrary manner to dissuade and silence citizens, organizations and the media.
Finally, it must be remembered that legal remedies already exist (criminal offenses and injunctions) to respond to threats, harassment or violence against any person, including elected officials.
At this stage, the only responsible action that Minister Laforest can and must undertake to truly respect the rights and freedoms of the population is to remove Chapter I of PL57 from the detailed study which will continue on May 21. Then, it will be a question of looking in depth at the very important issue of harassment experienced by elected officials.
Indeed, broader consultations would make it possible to hear from civil society, to take into account the rights and freedoms protected by the Quebec and Canadian charters, and to evaluate the recommendations made in various reports, particularly in terms of education and awareness.
Such steps are essential to avoid creating new problems in terms of attacks on freedom of expression and to find the right solutions for elected officials.