Marc Lemire Appeals outrageous ruling by the Federal Court on Section 13 censorship
Judge makes multiple errors and fails to mention he was a key player at DoJ who passed legislation which applied Section 13 to the internet!
NOVEMBER 30, 2012: Cutting through the post-hurricane Sandy’s driving rain, Marc Lemire filed his landmark appeal to the Federal Court of Appeals, challenging the outrageous ruling of Mr. Justice Mosley.
This appeal takes the question of the constitutionality of Section 13 to the Court of Appeals and questions several aspects of the Federal Court Judge’s decision. This Appeal is a damning critique of censorship and thought control which lay at the feet of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act ”Canada’s shameful and thoroughly discredited internet censorship legislation.
Marc Lemire’s 8+ Year Legal Ordeal
For those trying to keep track of Marc Lemire’s eight-year legal ordeal, here is a brief rundown on what has happened. In 2003, serial plaintiff Richard Warman filed a Section 13 complaint against Marc Lemire for postings on a message board he ran, and 1 post on his website The Freedomsite. Lemire removed the entire message board before receiving Warman’s complaint, and removed the single posting as soon as he received the complaint. (posting called “Aids Secrets” written by an American). Since Lemire removed the material, that should have been the end of the case. Since the Canadian Human Rights Act is a completely remedial piece of legislation (IE: not meant to punish anyone)
Well, the Canadian Human Rights Commission had different ideas of what “remedial” means, and the CHRC went on a fishing expedition to try to find anything else to prosecute Lemire with. The CHRC found a few documents, and Warman submitted a website he claimed Lemire ran. When Warman submitted the website, he also asked the CHRC to hide this from Lemire which the CHRC promptly did. In the interim, CHRC staffers signed up on message boards such as Stormfront,org and attempted to engage (entrap?!) Lemire in conversation, using an alias known as “Jadewarr”.
Notwithstanding the fact that Lemire remediated everything, the CHRC pushed on, and a Tribunal was set up to investigate Lemire and all the absurd claims being made against him.Ã‚Â As part of his defence, Lemire questioned the constitutional validity of Section 13 of the Human Rights Act.
After an over 30 day multi-year proceeding the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal threw out almost the entire case against Lemire. Hundreds of postings, websites and other material was put forward by the CHRC. The Tribunal ruled against every single alleged “hate” message Lemire was accused of, except for one. The Tribunal also found that Section 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act was unconstitutional.
The censors were not happy with that, and in 2009 (yes three years ago!!) the CHRC appealed to the Federal Court of Canada seeking a judicial review of the decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
With the constitutionality of Section 13 in question, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal stopped all enforcement of Section 13 and put on hold the cases which were before it (Arthur Topham, Henry Makow, etc) until a final decision in the Lemire case. Also while waiting for the Federal Court to rule, the Parliament of Canada passed Bill C-304, which repealed Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. (Currently at Second reading in the Senate of Canada)
In early October, 2012, the Federal Court after taking three years finally ruled. The court found that Section 13 of the Canadian Human Right Act was just fine but the penalty provision of the law was unconstitutional. Therefore the Federal Court stuck down Section 54 of the Human Rights Act, but left Section 13 intact.
That’s where we are now. If I chose not to appeal, the other cases which were halted awaiting a final decision in my case would be activated, and the victims would be dragged before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, and in some other cases, the Federal Court.
Federal Court Ruling by Mosley
The ruling by Liberal Appointee Justice Richard Mosley is at times totally inept and at other times vicious and revolting. On the inept side, the Judge could not even get the correct date of the Tribunal’s decision. In his decision, he claimed the decision date was “September 9, 2009,” when in fact, the Tribunal ruled on September 2, 2009.
The Judge totally confuses the history of Section 13 and how the penalty provisions were adopted. And his confusion of the law was then used as reasons to justify Section 13 at a later point. Unbelievable!
Mosley overturned finding of fact which the Tribunal made with respect to mediation. And he totally gets it all wrong and comes to a wrong conclusion. He simply heard the submissions of one party, and refused to look at the entire history of all the mediation in this case.
On the vicious side, Mosley looked at the historical amendments to Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act and found no issue with applying it to the internet. When it was first passed in the late 1970′s, Section 13 only applied to the limited aspects of a telephone answering machine. Then in 2001, under the guise of the “Anti-Terrorism Act,” Section 13 was applied to the entire internet and to interconnected computer networks.
And guess who was a key decision maker and “point man” for the “Anti-Terrorism Act” The same Act, which we say has made Section 13 unconstitutional? The one and only; Justice Richard Mosley.
In 2001, Justice Richard Mosley was the associate deputy minister for criminal law at the Department of Justice. During his time as deputy minister, he was the “point man“ for the “Anti-Terrorism Act” Mosley defended the legislation multiple times, including at multiple press conferences and even before Parliament. As Macleans reported “Even so, speaking at a press briefing around the same time, Mosley didn’t hesitate to dismiss concerns raised by reporters that the new law could violate civil liberties.”
One of the main arguments against Section 13′s constitutionality is that is now applies to the most interactive and inclusive medium the world has ever known the Internet. This is a key part of the Lemire Constitutional Challenge. And also expertly argued by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the BC Civil Liberties Association, and the Canadian Free Speech League.
Is it really any wonder that Judge Mosley completely ignored all our submissions with his crappy one line answer: “As found by the Tribunal at para 231 of the decision, the conclusion in Taylor on rational connection to the legislative objective still applies. I am of the same view.” After all; the application of Section 13 to the Internet was part of HIS legislation. HE defended it to the media and in front of a Parliament sub-committee. And it was Mosley that so quickly dismissed concerns about civil liberties over the so-called Anti-Terrorism Act.
Considering that Judge Mosley was a critical player and the “front man” for the 2001 amendments to Section 13 isn’t it fair to claim a reasonable apprehension of bias? And that Mosley should not sit in judgment over the very legislation that HE was so closely associated with, defended, justified and sold to Canadians?
In Canada, justice must be transparent and be seen to be transparent. It is bloody ridiculous that a Judge would sit on his high horse, and BERATE MY LAWYER, during the hearing, yet not say a word about how he was closely associated with part of the very law which we were challenging! Only in Absurdistan does this stuff happen!
Lemire Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeals