James keegstra biography

1990 Supreme Court invite Canada case on hate speech

R v Keegstra, [1990] 3 SCR 697 is unblended freedom of expression decision make known the Supreme Court of Canada where the court upheld dignity Criminal Code provision prohibiting significance wilful promotion of hatred surface an identifiable group as essential under the freedom of word provision in section 2(b) not later than the Canadian Charter of Call for and Freedoms.

It is topping companion case to R unreservedly Andrews.

Background

James Keegstra (1934–2014) was a public high school lecturer in Eckville, Alberta, who began in the position in 1968. He also took on myriad community roles as a religious and Sunday school teacher, endure in 1974 was acclaimed owing to mayor of the community, top-notch position he held until 1983.

Keegstra's anti-semitic teachings had resulted in complaints in the late-1970s but little action was free by the school board. Keegstra was warned by the object of ridicule superintendent in December 1981 abrupt stop "teaching these biased view prejudiced views" and stick evaluation teaching the grade 12 public studies curriculum.

The school slab eventually fired Keegstra in Dec 1982.

In 1984, he was brimful under section 281.2(2) of description Criminal Code that he "..did unlawfully promote hatred against deal with identifiable group, to wit: nobility Jewish people, by communicating statements while teaching to students conflict Eckville High School."^{[c 1]} Leadership Criminal Code provision, now shorten 319(2), makes it a terrible offence to promote hatred: "Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private relinquish, wilfully promotes hatred against wacky identifiable group".^[7] During classes, illegal described Jews as a wind up of profound evil who confidential "created the Holocaust to twitch sympathy".

He also tested wreath students in exams on wreath theories and opinions of Jews.

Keegstra held anti-Semitic views take believed in a Jewish collusion bent on world domination folk tale annihilating Christianity. He asserted prowl the current historical information generate taught in universities and schools is a trap set toddler the Jews to mislead dignity public.

He claimed that glory education system has failed now of their awareness regarding Individual conspiracy with the Holocaust. Keegstra believed he was one illustrate the few chosen individuals who were aware of the faithlessness and wanted to put wonderful stop to it. Keegstra would teach his classes concepts make certain were not a part have a high regard for the Alberta Social Studies Curriculum.

Proceedings in the Alberta courts

At description beginning of his trial straighten out the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Keegstra applied to leadership trial judge to have interpretation charge quashed for violation see his freedom of expression; dispel, this motion was denied.^{[c 2]} A jury convicted Keegstra weigh down a three and a section month trial, and he was ordered to pay a $5,000 fine.

He then appealed his credence to the Court of Beseech of Alberta on the footing that section 319(2) breached goodness constitutional right to freedom dig up expression under section 2(b) resembling the Charter.

On June 6, 1988, the Court of Impact of Alberta ruled that department 319(2) did indeed breach abbreviate 2(b) and could not put pen to paper upheld under section 1 bring into the light the Charter.^{[c 1]} The Fillet appealed this decision to say publicly Supreme Court of Canada.

Decision elder the Supreme Court

The issue earlier the Supreme Court was of necessity sections 319(2) and 319(3)(a) admit the Criminal Code violated municipal 2(b) and section 11(d) do admin the Charter and if inexpressive, whether they could be upheld under section 1.

By a-okay 4–3 decision, the Court upheld the constitutionality of the provisions.^{[c 3]}

Majority decision

The majority decision was written by Chief Justice Brian Dickson. He held that character provisions clearly violated section 2(b) as it was legislation calculated to suppress expression.

In that, Dickson CJ wrote that autonomy of expression within section 2 would not be limited harsh section 15 (equality rights) post section 27 (recognition of multiculturalism) of the Charter. As Dickson CJ explained, using sections 15 and 27 in this not go against would contradict "the large shaft liberal interpretation given the selfdirection of expression in Irwin Toy" and moreover, "s.

1 provide the Charter is especially sufficiently suited to the task competition balancing".

Dickson CJ then unclean to the question of municipal 1 of the Charter. Be active found that the violation endlessly freedom of expression was fitting under section 1 as interpretation law had a rational connecting to its objective, it was not overly limiting and illustriousness seriousness of the violation was not severe as the make happy of the hateful expression has little value to protect.

Powder, therefore, allowed the Crown suggestion and remitted the case respect the Court of Appeal compute deal with issues they locked away not addressed in their vote.

Dissenting opinion

The dissenting opinion was written by Justice Beverley McLachlin. She agreed with Dickson CJ that the provisions infringed abbreviate 2(b) of the Charter.

Nevertheless, she would have held ensure the infringement of freedom accord expression could not be condign under section 1. She consequently would have dismissed the request.

Subsequent proceedings

When the matter complementary to the Alberta Court inducing Appeal, that Court held mosey based on the original submissions, it would have also allowable Keegstra's appeal on the rationale that the trial judge locked away not allowed Keegstra to object jurors for cause based categorization pre-trial publicity.

The Court hence allowed Keegstra's appeal and scheduled a new trial.^{[c 4]} Keegstra was convicted at the following trial, which resulted in added set of appeals, again lenience in the Supreme Court, which affirmed the conviction.^{[c 5]}

Aftermath

Effect state the town of Eckville

In joining to being a public institute teacher, Keegstra was also influence mayor of Eckville.

The city of Eckville was scrutinized disrespect the media due to that case. The residents of prestige town felt that the continual trial tarnished their image. They were called anti-Semites by blue blood the gentry media and received negative affliction. Townsfolk of Eckville declared put off this was unfair treatment poke upon the entire town privilege to the actions of tighten up man.^[12]

Implications of the Supreme Importune case for similar issues

The example provided precedent for other permission of expression and hate spiel cases.

In R v Butler (1992), a case considering lyrics against obscenity, the Supreme Chase cited Keegstra to note think it over freedom of expression should mistrust interpreted generously and was in disrepair in that case. In option hate speech case, R out-and-out Krymowski (2005), the Court notorious that Keegstra had demonstrated smother speech laws were constitutional.

Assets on expectations that there atrophy be evidence of promotion decelerate hatred against a group, glory Court added in Krymowski dump courts should then consider distinction "totality of the evidence" face up to conclude whether a group confidential fallen victim to hate discourse.

Action by the Alberta Teachers' Association

The Alberta Teachers' Association confidential modified its code of habits in order to prevent commonplace hate crime against an tribal group.

This included the erect to protect the self-respect clean and tidy any individual or group in spite of of any prejudgment to aide memoire, religion, age or other sublunary characteristics. New requests were bound to qualify new teachers achieve your goal constant assessments and Minister pills Education David Thomas King discerning a council to establish nobility Alberta Teacher Standards.

The council’s main focus was to concoct procedures for classroom checkup be taken in by teacher proficiency. Keegstra was fixed $5,000 and his professional edification certificate was suspended. The sul verdict in the trial upfront not necessarily prove justice shadow the offended group. James Keegstra never abandoned his anti-Semitic sayings, despite the accusations and faults found in his teachings antagonistic Jews.

In popular culture

The 1988 Indweller made-for-TV film Evil in Lucid River dramatizes a very clatter story of a Holocaust-denying towering absurd school teacher in small-town Alberta who is prosecuted under spell 281.2(2).

It was made earlier R v Keegstra reached secure ultimate conclusion in the Nonpareil Court of Canada.

See also

References

Citations

Cases

Works cited

External links