1970 ⟶ Canadian Legislation Regarding Nazi Flags
Canada has no legislation specifically restricting the owner...
Year
1970
1977
1981
1984
🇨🇦 Canadian Legislation Regarding Nazi Flags
Canada has no legislation specifically restricting the ownership, display, purchase, import or export of Nazi flags. However, sections 318–320 of the Criminal Code, adopted by Canada's parliament in 1970 and based in large part on the 1965 Cohen Committee recommendations, provide law enforcement agencies with broad scope to intervene if such flags are used to communicate hatred in a public place (particularly sections 319(1), 319(2), and 319(7).⟶
CanadaNazi flagsCriminal CodeHate speechLegislation1970sFreedom of speechSymbolism
Canada🚶 Skokie Affair: Nazi Party's Right to March
National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 (1977) (also known as Smith v. Collin; sometimes referred to as the Skokie Affair), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with Freedom of assembly. The outcome was that the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the use of the Swastika is a symbolic form of free speech entitled to First Amendment protections and determined that the Swastika itself did not constitute "Fighting words." Its ruling allowed the National Socialist Party of America to march.⟶
National Socialist Party of AmericaSkokieFreedom of SpeechFirst AmendmentHate Speech1970sSwastika
United States📜 Ernst Zündel's Canadian Mailing Ban
From 1981 to 1982, Holocaust denier Ernst Zündel had his mailing privileges suspended by the Canadian government on the grounds that he had been using the mail to send hate propaganda, a criminal offence in Canada. Zündel then began shipping from a post office box in Niagara Falls, New York, until the ban on his mailing in Canada was lifted in January 1983.⟶
Holocaust DenialErnst ZündelHate SpeechMailing BanCanadaPropagandaFreedom of SpeechAnti-Semitism
CanadaUnited States⚖️ Supreme Court of Canada Upholds Keegstra's Conviction
Keegstra was charged under s 281.2(2) of the Criminal Code (now s 319(2), which provides that "Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group" commits a criminal offence. He was convicted at trial before the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench. The court rejected the argument, advanced by Keegstra and his lawyer, Doug Christie, that promoting hatred is a constitutionally protected freedom of expression as per s 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Keegstra appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal. That court agreed with Keegstra, and he was acquitted. The Crown then appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Canada, which rule by a 4–3 majority that promoting hatred could be justifiably restricted under s 1 of the Charter. The Supreme Court restored Keegstra's conviction. He was fired from his teaching position shortly afterwards.⟶
Hate SpeechCanadian LawFreedom of SpeechAntisemitismSupreme Court of CanadaJames KeegstraLegal CaseCanadian Charter of Rights and FreedomsLegislation
Canada