You might think that you have the right to express your opinion without government censorship or punitive action against you for holding an unpopular or politically incorrect viewpoint in Canada - but you'd be wrong.
Two weeks ago I reviewed Canadian writer Ezra Levant's book about the oilsands, but as it turns out, the writer's "shakedown" by the Alberta Human Rights Commission is an equally important read. Titled Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights, the book details Levant's fight for free speech.
Levant's story starts with the publishing of 12 cartoons originally published in Denmark depicting the Muslim prophet Muhammad, which sparked a lot of controversy. Levant, publisher of Western Standard (which has since stopped publishing in print), reprinted the cartoons, which he thought were newsworthy.
Apparently the government didn't think so. An imam from Calgary launched a complaint with the commission, which somehow forgot about the Charter's protection of freedom of speech in this country, making Levant the only publisher in the world to face government interrogation for reprinting the cartoons.
As Shakedown shows, one of the unfair aspects of the commissions is the penalizing of the defendant, unlike a real court, whether he wins or loses. The defendant is on the hook for legal costs, but the complainant gets free help. The system encourages nuisance claims because the complainer has nothing to lose, whereas the defendant loses either way and has no way to recuperate costs.
Perhaps the worst part of the commission is its quasi-judicial nature. They're not real courts. The commissioner doesn't have a legal background necessarily. A Grade 12 education is considered sufficient to be a commissioner in at least one case. In other cases, a clear conflict of interest between the appointee and possible respondents exists. The safeguards that evolved in Britain over centuries that are part of the Canadian legal tradition are done away with, including one's right to confront their accuser, and in some cases, the right to have access to evidence brought against you.
The book digs into numerous cases that show ludicrous decisions, or as the author puts it, "kangaroo courts," in action. In the case against Mark Steyn's essay published in Maclean's magazine, an essay on his view of the rise of Islam, the B.C. commission condemned the writer's interpretation of facts, Levant concludes. The commission dropped the case because, unlike other respondents, the iconic Canadian magazine is big enough to fight back - but not before losing half a million dollars in legal fees.
In another ridiculous case, a McDonald's employee was awarded $50,000 in B.C. because the employee felt she couldn't wash her hands due to a skin condition. The case illustrates the nanny state hard at work settling petty grievances and, more importantly, in conflict with its own food handling and sanitary laws.
The imam ended up dropping the case after Levant's interrogation by a commissioner hit YouTube. The case cost taxpayers $500,000 and Levant $100,000.
The case against Levant backfired - big time. It showed Canada that censorship has landed in the form of "human rights" commissions. Politicians from all parties have spoken out against provisions of the Human Rights Act, but it will take some serious pressure from the public to reform it in a meaningful way.
I started this book thinking that maybe human rights commissions might still have a role to play. Now I'm not so sure. The show trial of Levant should have never happened but it did. Now it's up to Canadians to do the right thing and pare down the bloated bureaucracy.
