The Federal Court of Appeal has upheld a $3,000 fine against Rebel News Network for using lawn signs to promote a book critical of the Liberal Party during the 2019 federal election campaign.
Blacklock's Reporter says the ruling dismissed the publisher's appeal and marked the end of a four-year prosecution.
“Rebel News does not dispute it transmitted an advertising message to the public during an election period,” wrote Justice Wyman Webb in the decision. “Rebel News does not dispute the lawn signs opposed the Liberal Party.”
At the center of the case was The Librano$: What The Media Won’t Tell You About Justin Trudeau’s Corruption, a book promoted by Rebel News during the 2019 election.
A week before the campaign began, the company launched a promotional effort that included lawn signs bearing the book’s title, prompting an investigation by Elections Canada.
The Canada Elections Act requires partisan advertisers to register during election campaigns and disclose spending. While the Act exempts the sale or promotion of books made publicly available regardless of an election, Elections Canada ruled that Rebel’s use of lawn signs constituted “election advertising” rather than an ordinary book promotion.
“Lawn signs are a staple of election campaigns but not of book launches,” Elections Canada stated in its Notices of Violation. Rebel News refused to pay the fine, pointing out that numerous other political books were published and promoted in 2019 without triggering federal investigations.
Rebel publisher Ezra Levant claimed the prosecution was politically motivated. “There were 24 books published about Trudeau in the 2019 election,” Levant said. “Mine was the only one that criticized Trudeau, and mine was the only one that was investigated, prosecuted and now convicted and punished.”
Rebel lawyers argued that the prosecution infringed on constitutional freedoms. “The Charter guarantees freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression including freedom of the press and other media of communication,” they wrote in their earlier appeal.
The case originated from seven complaints to the Commissioner of Elections, though the complainants were not identified. Critics questioned why the matter warranted such prolonged investigation.
“We are talking about a period of well over four years that the Office of the Commissioner of Elections devoted expenses and resources to this one particular instance of contravention of the Elections Act,” said Nando de Luca, counsel for the Conservative Party, during an April 1 hearing of the Commission on Foreign Interference.