Equality Project
Menu
  • Home
  • About
    • Our Project
    • Our Research Team
    • Our Partners
    • Our Students
    • Our Youth Advisory Committee
    • eQuality Annual Reports
  • Research
    • Research Projects
    • Research Publications
    • Conference Presentations
  • Policy
    • Policy Interventions
    • Policy Publications
  • Resources
    • Youth Summit
      • eQuality Project Youth Summit Documentary
    • Outreach Projects
    • Art Exchange
    • Cashing In: The Invisible Machine
    • CRM 1300 – Cybercrime & Surveillance
    • Disconnection Challenge
    • Connection Challenge
    • Half Girl, Half Face
    • International Day of the Girl
    • Legal Briefs: Tech-Facilitated Violence & the Law
    • Panel on AI & Algorithms
    • Pushback Timeline
    • Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law
    • #tresdancing
    • Transcending Technology – Between Freedom and Surveillance
    • unLine Exhibition
    • UROP & Student Posters
    • You Are What We Make You
    • Youth Speakers List
    • eQuality Lesson Plans
  • Follow Us
    • Twitter
    • eQuality News
    • eQuality Blog
    • Youth Speakers List
×
  • Home
  • About
    • Our Project
    • Our Research Team
    • Our Partners
    • Our Students
    • Our Youth Advisory Committee
    • eQuality Annual Reports
  • Research
    • Research Projects
    • Research Publications
    • Conference Presentations
  • Policy
    • Policy Interventions
    • Policy Publications
  • Resources
    • Youth Summit
      • eQuality Project Youth Summit Documentary
    • Outreach Projects
    • Art Exchange
    • Cashing In: The Invisible Machine
    • CRM 1300 – Cybercrime & Surveillance
    • Disconnection Challenge
    • Connection Challenge
    • Half Girl, Half Face
    • International Day of the Girl
    • Legal Briefs: Tech-Facilitated Violence & the Law
    • Panel on AI & Algorithms
    • Pushback Timeline
    • Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law
    • #tresdancing
    • Transcending Technology – Between Freedom and Surveillance
    • unLine Exhibition
    • UROP & Student Posters
    • You Are What We Make You
    • Youth Speakers List
    • eQuality Lesson Plans
  • Follow Us
    • Twitter
    • eQuality News
    • eQuality Blog
    • Youth Speakers List
×

Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law – Hate Propaganda

Home / Resources / Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law / Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law – Hate Propaganda

OFFENCE ELEMENTS - HATE PROPAGANDA

Public incitement of hatred

319 (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Willful promotion of hatred

(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction

Defences

(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)

(a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;
(b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;
(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or
(d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.

Forfeiture Confiscation

(4) Where a person is convicted of an offence under section 318 or subsection (1) or (2) of this section, anything by means of or in relation to which the offence was committed, on such conviction, may, in addition to any other punishment imposed, be ordered by the presiding provincial court judge or judge to be forfeited to Her Majesty in right of the province in which that person is convicted, for disposal as the Attorney General may direct.

Exemption from seizure of communication facilities

(5) Subsections 199(6) and (7) apply with such modifications as the circumstances require to section 318 or subsection (1) or (2) of this section.

Consent

(6) No proceeding for an offence under subsection (2) shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General.

Definitions

(7) In this section,

communicating includes communicating by telephone, broadcasting or other audible or visible means;

identifiable group has the same meaning as in section 318;

public place includes any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, express or implied;

statements includes words spoken or written or recorded electronically or electro-magnetically or other-wise, and gestures, signs or other visible representations

SELECTED CASE LAW

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

ALBERTA:
2006 ABPC 360

BRITISH COLUMBIA:
2017 BCSC 551
2008 BCSC 215
[2002] 57 WCB (2d) 234 (BCPC)

ONTARIO:
2017 ONCJ 565
[2006] 72 WCB (2d) 128 (ONCA)
[2001] 52 WCB (2d) 128 (ONCA)

QUEBEC:
2016 QCCQ 6762
2013 QCCQ 4285
2007 QCCQ 384

SASKATCHEWAN:
2011 SKPC 47

Contact

The eQuality Project
University of Ottawa, Brooks 410,
100 Thomas More Private
Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5
CANADA

E-Mail: info@equalityproject.ca
Website: equalityproject.ca
Twitter: @eQuality_ca

About

The eQuality Project is funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

SSHRC Logo

Icons made by Elegant Themes from www.flaticon.com are licensed as CC BY 3.0

Powered By Accesspress Themes