[Editor's Note: Many thanks to Fourhorses for putting together this article and presenting some important questions.]
Constitutional Challenge S13 Radical Press & Christie
February 23, 2009
In early February of this year, Arthur Topham of the Radical Press posted his verbal notification to Keren Jensen (CHRC) of his intent to launch a constitutional challenge to Section 13. http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=910
This is in regards to the complaint launched against Topham/Radical Press via co-complainants Harry Abrams and B’nai Brith – Complaint No.: 20071016
Today, there is a posting that Canadian Free Speech lawyer, Doug Christie has applied as intervener:
In a letter to Registry Officer Nancy LaFontant and Tribunal member Karen Jensen of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in Ottawa, Ontario Mr. Christie stated:
“I am general counsel of the Canadian Free Speech League, and as such I am interested in the case of Arthur Topham. I would like the opportunity to intervene on behalf of the free speech issues raised in this case. We were allowed intervention status in the case of Marc Lemire, and it is our desire to assist in the maintenance of a constitutional challenge to the enabling legislation, as well as to participate in the fact-finding that would be the foundation of such an assessment.”
Will the CHRC allow Christie to intervene on behalf of free speech ?
Will Karen [Jensen Tribunal member] and Jenny [Jennifer Lynch, the chief human-rights commissioner] meet their match with the likes of Doug ?
Will the CHRC disallow Christie because he is too good, doesn’t tolerate the BS and can run circles around them ?
What is the basis of the constitutional challenge to Section 13 that Topham/Radical Press is planning ?
Will the CHRC dismiss, out-of-hand, this challenge as they did with Melissa Guille’s constitutional challenge?
Will Jenny order the CHRC to redact all documentation and withhold it for several years as was done in the Lemire constitutional challenge ?
Will the Attorney General’s office intervene again and remind us that speech “chill” is OK and it depends upon who says it ?
Will B’nai Brith get double status as co-complainant and as intervener ?
Will the CHRC/CHRT extend the envelope of new jurisprudence , and again usurp the authority of the Supreme Court ?
… stay tuned to see if the kangaroos hop over our rights again.
Freedom really does not evolve, it revolts.Ã‚Â