Cabinet is moving forward on a pending bill to censor legal internet content and will introduce the legislation as soon as possible, Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino said yesterday. The effort has stalled since first proposed in 2019..“I assure you that Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez and others within our government are leaning in on this and will bring forward the legislation as quickly as possible,” Mendicino told reporters. He set no deadline..According to Blacklock's Reporter, a previous Bill C-36 An Act To Amend The Criminal Code proposed $70,000 fines on internet users who posted words “likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group.” The bill was introduced June 23, 2021 and lapsed in the last Parliament..Cabinet went further in a July 29, 2021 Technical Paper and Discussion Paper that proposed to appoint a chief censor called the Digital Safety Commissioner with powers to take anonymous complaints on hurtful Facebook posts, conduct closed-door hearings and issue takedown orders to block websites..A total 9,218 submissions were received by the Department of Canadian Heritage on the proposals. Petitioners were overwhelmingly opposed..“I know that Minister Rodriguez is very eager to bring forward this legislation,” Mendicino said yesterday. The heritage minister and Attorney General David Lametti “and others within our government are very eager to take the feedback they have received,” he said..Any legislation must “ensure that people can have robust free speech” but “also delineate some clear boundaries on what is not acceptable,” said Mendicino. Hate speech is illegal in Canada under 1970 amendments to the Criminal Code..The heritage department in a February 3 report What We Heard: The Government’s Proposed Approach To Address Harmful Online Content acknowledged “only a small number of submissions from stakeholders were supportive” of censorship..“Concerned stakeholders expressed that requiring the removal of speech that would otherwise be legal would raise risks of undermining access to information, limiting Charter rights namely the freedom of expression and restricting the exchange of ideas and viewpoints that are necessary in a democratic society,” wrote staff..Free speech advocates, academics and human rights groups called the proposal “aggressive,” “punitive” and “disturbing.” The University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab said federal regulation was so sweeping it would quash political dissent..“The proposals fail to account for the importance of protecting the kinds of expression that are most central to a free and democratic society including journalism, academic scholarship and public interest research, debate, artistic creation, criticism and political dissent,” Citizen Lab wrote in its submission to the heritage department.
