Top court’s ruling on hate-speech laws sets out guidelines

Most of Saskatchewan code found to be constitutional; Whatcott ordered to pay

The Supreme Court of Canada has struck down as too sweeping part of Saskatchewan’s human rights code banning any speech that “ridicules, belittles, or affronts the dignity of any person or persons,” and in doing so has set out guidelines for all provinces to use in determining what may be construed as hate speech.

The top court found that most of the province’s human rights code was constitutional, and so it ruled against a man who had distributed anti-gay pamphlets in Saskatchewan.

It said that two of four types of flyers he handed out were, in fact, hate speech and that he must pay $7,500 to two people who received them. The other two flyers did not meet the definition, according to the court.

‘The court has made its position clear: when it comes to speech, we are free to be critical, controversial and even careless but we cannot be hateful.’

DAVID ARNOT Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission chief commissioner

William Whatcott called the judgment “complete rubbish,” said he would not be paying the sum and would continue to hand out flyers because he believes it’s God’s plan for him.

“I’d rather follow God than seven socialists who wear black robes and think they’re smart,” Whatcott said in an interview with Postmedia News.

“I’m very concerned regarding the state of religious liberty and free speech in this country in light of this ruling.”

Whatcott, who engaged in homosexual activities before finding religion, placed four anti-gay flyers in the mailboxes of various homes in Saskatoon and Regina in 2001 and 2002 on behalf of the Christian Truth Activists, according to court documents.

Four of the people who received the flyers filed complaints, saying the material “promotes hatred against individuals because of their sexual orientation,” in violation of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code.

The original human rights tribunal agreed, ordering Whatcott to pay $17,500 to four individuals who were offended by his words. But in 2010 the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal granted Whatcott’s appeal, ruling that the anti-gay flyers were not hate speech.

The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission appealed to Canada’s top court, and the case was heard in October 2011 before finally being decided Wednesday.

In a 6-0 decision, the Supreme Court sided with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, in part.

The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission called Wednesday’s decision a victory for minority groups, who are often the targets of discrimination.

“The court has made its position clear: when it comes to speech, we are free to be critical, controversial and even careless but we cannot be hateful,” David Arnot, chief commissioner for the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, said in a written statement.

In narrowing the definition of Saskatchewan’s hate speech laws, the Supreme Court set out a test to act as a guide for other provinces when viewing hatred in the context of a prohibition of expression: whether a reasonable person would view it as likely to expose a person or persons to “detestation and vilification on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.”

The top court found that two of Whatcott’s flyers — identical reprints of a page of classified ads from a gay publication, along with his hand-written note that sodomy shouldn’t be legal in Saskatchewan — were offensive but weren’t hate speech.

“Offensive ideas are not sufficient to ground a justification for infringing on freedom of expression. While such expression may inspire feelings of disdain or superiority, it does not expose the targeted group to hatred,” the justices said.

But the other two — which equated homosexuals with “carriers of disease, sex addicts, pedophiles and predators” — would be seen objectively as exposing homosexuals to “detestation and vilification,” the court added.