Kleiner Sieg für Redefreiheit in Kanada

Verfassungsrechtliches Gutachten schlägt Abschaffung von Artikel 13 des Canadian Human Rights Acts vor.

Die Canadian Human Rights Commission (CRHC - Kanadische Menschenrechtskommission) wurde in den 70 Jahren zur Gedankenpolizei von Kanada gemacht.   Artikel 13 des Canadian Human Rights Act ("Kanadisches Menschenrechtsgesetz") verbietet die Verbreitung von Meinung, die eine identifizierbare Gruppe Haß oder Verachtung aussetzen würde.  Es ist hierbei absolut irrelevant, ob die Aussagen Tatsachen entsprechen oder nicht.  Dem Mißbrauch dieses Artikels ist dadurch Tür und Tor geöffnet, die Redefreiheit ist damit komplett ausgehebelt, da es de facto keine Verteidigung gegen unter diesem Artikel erhobene Vorwürfe gibt. 

Nun hat ein von der CHRC selbst eingesetzter Professor für Verfassungsrecht in einem Gutachten die Aufhebung dieses Artikels empfohlen.  Leider ist mit m.E. nicht damit zu rechnen, daß Prof. Robert Moon Gehör finden wird.  Dies hat er wohl selbst so gesehen, da er schon eine Alternative zu einer ersatzlosen Streichung in den Empfehlungen eingebaut hat.

Hier die Empfehlungen wie sie auf canadianhumanrightscommission.blogspot.com wiedergeben wurden:

"1. The first recommendation is that section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) be repealed so that the CHRC and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) would no longer deal with hate speech, in particular hate speech on the Internet.

Hate speech should continue to be prohibited under the Criminal Code but confined to expression that advocates, justifies or threatens violence. In the fight against hate on the Internet, police and prosecutors should make greater use of section 320.1 of the Criminal Code, which gives a judge power to order an Internet service provider (ISP) to remove "hate propaganda" from its system.

2. The second part of the recommendations concerns changes that should be made to section 13 of the CHRA if it is not repealed.

These changes would reshape section 13 so that it more closely resembles a criminal restriction on hate speech.

They include:

changes to the language in order to clarify that the section prohibits only the most extreme instances of discriminatory expression, that threatens, advocates or justifies violence against the members of an identifiable group;.

the amendment of section 13(1) of the CHRA to include an intention requirement; and

the amendment of the CHRA to establish a distinct process for the investigation of section 13 complaints by the CHRC. Under the amended process, the CHRC would receive inquiries and information from individuals or community groups but would no longer investigate and assess formal complaints."

Dies entspricht den Zusammenfassungen in den Berichten anerkannter Medien.

Die überregionale Tageszeitung Globe & Mail kommentiert:

"Allowing a human-rights commission to police the country's newspapers and magazines for their coverage of religious or other minorities is a terrible idea, yet that is the law, though most Canadians may not realize it."

"the commission is in a watchdog role that sits awkwardly in a free society."

 "The hate-speech provision of the rights act is much broader than the hate law in the Criminal Code. It requires only a likelihood that the speech will cause hatred or contempt, rather than an intent to promote hatred. The wording is broad enough to encompass written material that uses satire to achieve its aims, or that reflects stereotypes, or merely seems to. There is no defence of fair comment. It allows the commission (or people who complain to it) to take aim at those who give offence. Yet open debate in a democracy is grounded in the right to offend."

Die selbe Zeitung berichtet aus einer Gerichtsverhandlung die u.a. über ein Verwerfen dieses Artikels entscheiden soll über die Aussage von Paul Fromm, eines Unterstützers des Antragstellers Marc Lemire (der hier selbst Angeklagter ist), wie folgt:

"He also denounced a CHRC lawyer for saying earlier this week that racial jokes ought to be fair game for Section 13 complaints: 'My response is that to condemn jokes is going pretty far down the road to the old Soviet Union,' he said.

Mr. Fromm also criticized the fact that 100 per cent of the Section 13 complaints referred to tribunals by the Canadian Human Rights Commission have been successful. 'A 100 per cent success rate?' he said. 'That doesn't happen this side of North Korea.'"

Nachfolgend der Wortlaut des Artikels 13 des CHRA:

13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of any matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking.

(3) For the purposes of this section, no owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking communicates or causes to be communicated any matter described in subsection (1) by reason only that the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking owned or operated by that person are used by other persons for the transmission of that matter. [1976-77, c.33, s.13.]

zitiert von www.efc.ca/pages/law/canada/canada.H-6.part-1.html#5