http://montreal.kijiji.

ca/c-buy-and-sell-clothing-womens-tops-outerwear-Coquille-
souple-North-Face-W!!"d#d$%&''(&))
http://www.tremblant.ca/acti*ities-and-e*ents/details/hiking.asp+
http://www.e*erytrail.com/browse.php,acti*ity-id.%/city.0ont-
1remblant/country.canada/state.quebec
http://www.sepaq.com/pq/mot/inde+.dot,language-id.'
) 2ctober 3 Ci*il 4iberties
5ackground
During the 1995 referendum he caused an uproar when it was reported by columnist Chantal Hbert in the La
Presse newspaper that despite the guarantee of an offer of partnership with the rest of Canada before declaring
sovereignty following a "Yes" vote !ari"eau had told a group of foreign diplomats that what mattered most was to get a
ma#ority vote from $uebec citi"ens for the proposal to secede from Canada because with that $uebecers would be
trapped "lobsters thrown into boiling water"%
&'(
)n the night of the referendum $uebec came within only a few thousands
of votes of separation but the Yes side still lost% *n his concession speech !ari"eau said sovereignty had been defeated
by "money and the ethnic vote" and referred to the +rancophones who voted Yes in the referendum as "nous" ,us- when
he said that this ma#ority group was for the first time no longer afraid of political independence% ./0 of $uebec
+rancophones voted Yes% However the sovereigntist side accepted the results of the vote which they had initiated%
N2W:
*n )ctober 1/12 to the shoc3 and surprise of many $uebecers !ari"eau denounced his earlier infamous "money and the
ethnic vote" statement to come out against the $uebec Charter of 4alues which would ban religious symbols and clothing
in the public sector ,but not the crucifi5 over the 6ational 7ssembly !resident8s chair the Charter having deemed it and
related ob#ects "symbols of $uebec8s history"-%
&9(
( 3 e+posed 6acial 7ro8iling 3 started by 1oronto 9tar :9tar obtained ; yrs worth
o8contact card details 8rom police - In a freedom of information request that spanned nearly
seven years, the Starobtained six years worth of contact-card data from Toronto police.<
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/knowntopolice('&/('&/=/(>/e+cuse-me-o88icer-wh
y-are-you-stopping-me.html
Number ' newspaper in Canada 3 ha*e the clout to e+pose such situations
?nlike small newspapers with relati*ely limited 8inancial capabilities
@i88icult 8or indi*iduals to challenge at a systemic le*el.
A*en independent watchdog institutions needs support 8rom agency like a media to obtain
in8o that they themsel*es cannot a88ord to put up.
2mbudsman operates only on a country rather than 8ederal le*el 3 e*en they donBt ha*e
the budget
NAA@ C2NCA61A@ AFF2619 F620 ACA6D2NA 3 mediaE acti*istsE go*ernments
etc
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/raceandcrime/('/(/;/race-matters-blacks-docu
mented-by-police-at-high-rate.html
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/raceandcrime.html
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/raceandcrime/('/(/;/story-behind-the-numbers
.html
Reporter Jim Rankin asked Toronto police for updated arrest data in ay, !""#, as a follow-up to
the Toronto Stars !""! series into race, policin$ and crime in Toronto. Rankin also asked for a second data
set that details who Toronto police choose to stop and document in encounters that usually result in no
arrest or char$es.
%olice denied the re&uests, settin$ in motion a len$thy battle that involved multiple appeals and counter
appeals, a re&uest for a stay by police, a trip to divisional court and a final visit to the 'ntario (ourt of
)ppeal last January, which resulted in a clarification of what institutions must do to respond to public
re&uests for electronic data. It also affirmed a much earlier decision *%+,- by 'ntarios Information and
%rivacy (ommissioner that re&uired police to issue decision letters.
.oth the (ommissioner and the (anadian (ivil /iberties )ssociation made ar$uments in that final,
successful appeal by the Star.
In late !""0, Toronto police char$ed the Star 12!,""" in pro$rammin$ fees 3 an amount the Star is
appealin$ 3 and handed over the data. 4ames of citi5ens and officers, and other personal information,
removed. Star database specialist )ndrew .ailey and Rankin spent over a month vettin$ and analy5in$ the
data. The analysis includes a replication of the analysis behind the !""! series and a look at the never-
before-released contacts data.
Free Expression and Opinion
6ight o8 indi*iduals to access common plat8orms
Ford * !uebec
9';-(& could not be in*oked by Fed go*t in connection with a matter o8 pro*incial
jurisdiction - Federal Fo*t cannot use language rights pro*isions to in8ringe in !uebec
:pro*incial<
'. aboriginal rights
(. linguistics rights
&. e*eryone else
:any Charter cases regarding the use of the ;nglish and +rench languages have not been fought on the grounds of
section 1.%
&2(
+or e5ample $uebec8s <ill 1/1 which limited the use of ;nglish was considered to be invalid in certain
respects not because it conflicted with section 1. but because it infringed freedom of e5pression which is guaranteed
by section 1 of the Charter%
<ecause of the fed vs provincial thingy%
=anguage so intimately related to form and content of e5pression that there cannot be true freedom of
e5pression by means of lang if one is prohibited from using the lang of one>s choice%
Little Sisters Book and Art Emporium v. Canada (Minister of Justice) &1///( 1 ?%C%@% 111/ 1/// ?CC .9 is a
leading ?upreme Court of Canada decision on freedom of e5pression and eAuality rights under the Canadian Charter of
@ights and +reedoms% *t was held that theCustoms 7ct which gave broad powers to customs inspectors to e5clude
"obscene" materials violated the right to freedom of e5pression under section 1 but was #ustifiable under section 1%
However they found that the way the law was implemented by customs officials was discriminatory and should be
remedied an opinion they suggested would avail the boo3store in any further legal battles% Bhey also struc3 down part of
the law that put the onus on an importer to prove material was not obscene% Bhe ruling therefore upheld the right of
Canada Customs to prevent the importation of material that had already been banned as obscene by the courts but
curtailed the agency8s right to preemptively or punitively detain material that had not been so ad#udicated
?trategy of bringing in different interveners to ta3e part in different parts of the case%
Creater 4ancouver Bransportation 7uthority v Canadian +ederation of ?tudentsD
7rgument made by City E ?tudents forcing the city to recogni"e their right using the city>s bus to propagate something F
asserting positive formulation of freedom of e5pression%
Court said no 3 pre*enting them access to area e*eryone else can accessE no pre*ention o8
ampli8erE pre*enting access to plat8orm 3 negati*e 8ormulation
6ead:
Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott 2013 SCC 11
)n +ebruary 15 1/1/ Ghatcott had the ?as3atchewan Human @ights Bribunal ruling against him alleging discrimination
against four homose5uals and fining him H195// overturned by the ?as3atchewan Court of 7ppeal% !art of the #udgment
acAuitting Ghatcott read "the manner in which children in the public school system are to be e5posed to messages about
different forms of se5uality and se5ual identity is inherently controversial% *t must always be open to public debate% Bhat
debate will sometimes be polemical and impolite%"
&11(
Bhe ?as3atchewan Human @ights Commission appealed to the ?upreme Court of Canada which decided to hear the
case%
&12(
Ghatcott appeared before the ?upreme Court of Canada on )ctober 11 1/11 to defend his views on homose5uality%
Ghile the #udges and lawyers were preparing to hear Ghatcott8s case the activist delivered 2/// more flyers on
homose5uality throughout )ttawa and got thrown off the Carleton Iniversity campus for delivering the flyers there%
&1'(
:ore interveners appeared in Ghatcott8s case both for and against him than in any other ?upreme Court case in the
history of Canada%
&15(
*ntervening on behalf of Ghatcott were the Canadian Constitution +oundation
&1.(
the Canadian Civil
=iberties 7ssociation Canadian Journalists for +ree ;5pression the Christian =egal +ellowship
&19(
the ;vangelical
+ellowship of Canada the Catholic Civil @ights =eague and the +aith K +reedom 7lliance%
&1L(
*ntervening against Ghatcott
were 7ttorney Ceneral of 7lberta Canadian Human @ights Commission 7lberta Human @ights Commission ;gale
Canada *nc% )ntario Human @ights Commission Canadian Jewish Congress Initarian Congregation of ?as3atoon and
Canadian Initarian Council Gomen>s =egal ;ducation and 7ction +und Canadian <ar 7ssociation 6orthwest Berritories
Human @ights Commission and Yu3on Human @ights Commission =eague for Human @ights of <>nai <rith Canada
Inited Church of Canada 7ssembly of +irst 6ations +ederation of ?as3atchewan *ndian 6ations and :tis 6ationF
?as3atchewan and the 7frican Canadian =egal Clinic%
*n +ebruary 1/12 the Court decided that although <ible passages biblical beliefs and the principles derived from those
beliefs can be legally and reasonably advanced in public discourse e5treme manifestations of the emotion described by
the words "detestation" and "vilification" cannot be%
&19(
7 documentary was made on Ghatcott8s conversion to Christianity and his crusades against abortion and homose5uality%
Bhe film featured prominently at )ttawa8s +ree Bhin3ing +ilm +estival on 6ovember 11 1/11%
&2/(
6aising o8 8ree speech automatically brings about a certain discourse
#nteresting stragegy 3 Crown did not 8rame it in the 8orm o8 8ree speech/e+pression
5ut more as misdemeanor/disturbing the peace through pamphlet-ing
#n mugaseera: Court said can look at content o8 speech in themsel*es 3 donBt need casual
link because the attacks had a broad base
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0ugesera-*.-Canada-:0inister-o8-CitiGenship-and-#mmig
ration<
Mugesera v. Canada (Minister of Citizensip and !mmigration) &1//5( 1 ?%C%@% 1//
Chec3 outD
Bra#ectory from Baylor ,199/- to Gattcoc3 ,1/12-
Protecting Vulnerable Minorities in Canada: Muslims in the Mass
Media
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-rights-complaints-against-0acleanIs-magaGine
JURIST Special Guest Columnist Faisal Joseph, counsel for a group of Canadian law
students who recently filed human rights complaints against the Canadian
newsmagazine Maclean's for its refusal to publish a response to a string of articles
allegedly targeting uslim Canadians, says that a gaping hole in the !ntario "uman
Rights Code lea#es minority groups ha#ing little or no public #oice without a remedy
for redressing group defamation and racism disseminated in the mass media $$$
http://jurist.org/8orum/()/%/protecting-*ulnerable-minorities-in.phpJ
0aclean 0agaGine
Unfortunately, notwithstanding their recognition of the "Islamophobic" content of several
articles published by Maclean's, the Commission was unable to proceed with my clients'
complaints because s. !"# of the $ntario %uman &ights Code does not cover the content of
newspapers and maga'ines. (his gaping hole in the Code leaves minority groups, with little or
no public voice, without a remedy for redressing group defamation and racism disseminated in
our mass media.
)lternative venues to combat media*promulgated racism are conspicuously limited. +es,
Canada has criminal hate speech laws, but when the sources of hate speech are found in our
own print and broadcast ,ournalism, they provide little or no protection to minorities. )ll hate
speech prosecutions re-uire the )ttorney .eneral's consent * an unli/ely event if the potential
defendant is a large media organi'ation.
"nother interesting 72C
http://www.hu88ingtonpost.ca/bernie-8arber/section-'&-hate-crime-b-';'>(K.html
http://www.hu88ingtonpost.ca/('(/;/)/bill-c-&K-hate-speech-tories-n-'%)'K&>.html