From the UK to Iceland, it seems speech laws are taking over Europe.What's worse — this may not just be a trend for our European neighbors, but could also apply to North America — namely Canada.Canada has free speech laws — known as freedom of expression under section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.But under a new bill — Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, which is currently at the committee consideration stage — this could all change..The bill would make "hate-motivated crimes a specific offence, ensuring such conduct is more clearly denounced and that offenders are held accountable."In the bill, a "crime motivated by hatred" is an offence "motivated by hatred based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation or gender identity or expression."They introduced a new definition of hatred, stated Christine Van Geyn, lawyer and the Canadian Constitution Foundation's (CCF) litigation director, to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in consideration of Bill C-9."The bill introduces a new statutory definition of hatred that departs from the Supreme Court's jurisprudence."."For over 30 years, the court has required hatred to mean the emotion of an intense and extreme nature that is clearly associated with vilification and detestation."Van Geyn states Bill C-9 dilutes the definition and "shifts from detestation and vilification to detestation or vilification, and it removes the requirement for extremeness." "Bill C-9 expands the criminal law into the realm of expression in ways that risk unjustified violations of the Charter right to free expression.""It lowers the threshold for hate propaganda offences, removes safeguards against politicized or abusive prosecutions, introduces vague new offences and risks killing lawful debate in Canada."."Our constitutional tradition is clear — freedom of expression protects even offensive and disturbing speech, and even hateful views unless they cross a very high threshold.""This high threshold exists so Canadians can freely discuss controversial ideas, especially on sensitive political and moral topics, without fearing criminal sanction."Van Geyn issues a warning: the bill, in simple terms, will "criminalize opinion."This, Van Geyn notes, goes against Canadians' right to freedom of expression, which gives everyone in Canada the right to freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression — however, there is a catch. .Section one of the Charter can limit the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter, defined as "reasonable limits prescribed by law."However, it has been established that these limits prescribed by the law must not be vague. If convicted and found guilty of a "hate crime", maximum penalties can range from five years to life imprisonment.Canada is not the only attempting to introduce speech legislation in the name of opposing "hatred."In fact, many European countries have had this legislation in their criminal codes — for years..Take the UK, they are now infamous for their multiple restrictions on speech.For example, their Malicious Communications Act of 1988 makes it a crime to post threatening or abusive messages online or to send them to someone, causing them distress.According to JMW Solicitors, the act can apply to social media posts.To charge somebody with this offence "authorities must demonstrate that the sender's intentions were to cause distress or anxiety to the recipient."Another law, the Communications Act of 2003, makes it an offence to send any messages through a "public electronic communications network" that are "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character."."Both acts have been the subject of scrutiny and debate, but have been increasingly applied to modern forms of communication by law enforcement, often to address issues ranging from cyberbullying and harassment to threats and the dissemination of false information," states JMW solicitors.Original custody data reported by the Times showed UK police were making about 12,000 arrests a year under both acts for sending messages that "cause 'annoyance', 'inconvenience' or 'anxiety' to others via the internet, telephone or mail."In 2023, UK police from 27 different police forces made 12,183 arrests under the acts.In Ireland, the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act of 1989 affects speech by setting legal limits on what people can say publicly..This includes comments on race, religion, nationality or sexual orientation deemed as "hateful."As Sky News reports, Enoch Burke, an Irish teacher who worked at Wilson's Hospital School, was suspended from his role in 2022 after confronting the then-principal over objection to using the new name and pronouns "they" for a student.He was then suspended from the school and despite this, continued to attend the school — after which a judge ordered Burke to stop attending.Since then, Burke has been jailed multiple times for breaching court orders and there is currently a manhunt for him underway after a Dublin Court ordered his imprisonment once again last week..Then we have Iceland — where similar things are happening.Eldur Smári Kristinsson, an Icelandic gay rights activist, is facing criminal prosecution under Iceland's General Penal Code, Article 233 (a) which makes it illegal to publicly insult, mock, or threaten, someone because of their race, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity, with penalties of up to 2 years in prison.Kristinsson posted on X in August 2024, reacting to an article "telling us the reader how wonderful it is for a man or trans woman to be able to breastfeed, and why it's good for 'mom' and baby," stated Kristinsson in an interview on GB News.Kristinsson says he criticized the article because "the man cannot carry a child, nor give birth to it.""So what is the motivator behind a man actually taking drugs to induce lactation to breastfeed the child — whose needs are being satisfied here?".Kristinsson claims it was a form of child abuse.Kristinsson's lawyer believes he has a high likelihood of being charged.Another case in Leeds, UK: Jordan Parlour, was sentenced to 20 months in prison after publishing Facebook posts that "incited racial hatred," according to Sky News in August 2024.Prior to his post, major unrest had erupted online due to individuals falsely identifying the suspect of a killer of three young girls attacked in Southport — a suspect they believed to be at the Britannia Hotel."Every man and his dog should smash [the] f*** out of Britannia hotel (in Leeds)" wrote Parlour in a Facebook post..Referring to asylum seekers who were in the hotel, he stated, "They are over here given a life of Riley off the tax of us hard-working people earn when it could be put to better use... come here with no work visa, no trade to their name and sit and doss."At the time the hotel which had 210 asylum seekers in it were forced into "lockdown" because people were throwing "missiles and breaking windows."Further damage to the hotel was caused after the post, and the judge for Parlour's case, Judge, Guy Kearl KC, concluded, "You took to social media in order to encourage others towards participation in the attacks upon the hotel.""The initial post received six likes. However, it was sent to your 1,500 Facebook friends and, because of your lack of privacy settings, will have been forwarded to friends of your friends."."The messages were therefore spread widely, which was plainly your intention."Parlour, who at the time had a broken heel, was at home when he wrote the post.
