Hate crime suspects may face arrest before commiting offence
JUSTIN TRUDEAU’S government has proposed giving judges the power to put someone under house arrest if they fear they could commit a hate crime.
Critics have warned the “draconian” bill is an overreach of power and could hinder free speech and difficult discussions.
But Canada’s justice minister defended the measure, claiming it would be an “important” tool to help protect potential victims.
An online harms bill introduced by the Liberals last week proposed a string of laws to protect children and prosecute hate crimes.
One of the suggested measures would give judges the ability to put people under house arrest who they worry could commit a hate crime in the future. The person could also be made to wear an electronic tag if the attorney-general requested it.
Arif Virani, the justice minister, said the measures could prove “very important” in restraining the behaviour of someone who might be targeting minority groups.
“[If] there’s a genuine fear of an escalation, then an individual or group could come forward and seek a peace bond against them and to prevent them from doing certain things,” Mr Virani said.
Preventative measures could include banning the person from being near a synagogue or a mosque or restrictions on internet use.
He said: “That would help to de-radicalise people who are learning things online and acting them out in the real world violently – sometimes fatally.”
Mr Virani said content that is “awful but lawful” would remain online and a high threshold would have to be met to use the powers.
“What’s really critical is that it gives the judge a wonderful range of sentences. This is not a mandatory minimum of a life sentence, this is just a larger range, including what would be the maximum sentence,” he said.
Measures proposed in Bill C-63, which was unveiled on Feb 26 , include a new hate crime offence which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment for the most serious cases.
The bill would also make online platforms swiftly take down child sexual abuse material, as well as sexual content posted without consent.
Following the publication of the proposed bill, Pierre Poilievre, the opposition leader, said his party did not believe in “censoring opinions”.
“We do not believe that the government should be banning opinions that contradict the prime minister’s radical ideology,” he said.
Noa Mendelsohn Aviv, of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, criticised the “draconian penalties” proposed by the bill.
He warned it could lead to “violations of expressive freedom, privacy, protest rights, and liberty” and a new offence introduced “risks misuse or overuse by police, and unfairness to accused persons in court”.
One aspect of the bill would allow people to file complaints to the Canadian Human Rights Commission over what is perceived as hate speech online.