Connect with us

Crime

Online Harms bill could see Canadians face house arrest based on citizen complaints: Constitutional lawyer

Published

10 months ago

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Constitutional lawyer Marty Moore has warned LifeSiteNews that under the proposed Online Harms Act, courts could impose restrictions on Canadians under threat of jail if there is ‘fear’ the accused may commit a ‘hate crime’ in the future.

A top constitutional lawyer has told LifeSiteNews that the most “shocking” part of the Trudeau government’s proposed “Online Harms Act” is that it could allow provincial courts to impose house arrest on Canadians over a “fear” that they may commit a “hate crime” in the future.

“Possibly the most shocking part of this Bill is the addition of section 810.012 to the Criminal Code,” Marty Moore, who serves as the Litigation Director for Charter Advocates Canada, which is fully funded by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), told LifeSiteNews. 

“Under this new provision, a person can assert to a provincial court that they ‘fear’ someone will promote genocide or antisemitism, and that provincial court is empowered to jail a person for one year (two years if they have previously been convicted of such an offense) if they refuse to agree to court-imposed conditions.” 

Moore noted that the “court-imposed conditions” could be the mandated wearing of an ankle monitor, having a curfew, or not communicating with certain people.    

Similar pre-crime punitive tactics may also be carried out against Canadians for other so-called “hate” offenses unrelated to antisemitism or genocide, something Justice Minister Arif Virani, who introduced Bill C-63 into Parliament Monday, continues to defend.

“[If] there’s a genuine fear of an escalation, then an individual or group could come forward and seek a peace bond against them and to prevent them from doing certain things,” Virani said Wednesday, arguing that such tactics “would help to de-radicalize people who are learning things online and acting out in the real world violently – sometimes fatally.”

If passed, Bill C-63 will create the “Online Harms Act” and modify existing laws, including the Criminal Code and the Canadian Human Rights Act, in what the Liberals under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau claim will target certain already illegal internet content such as child sexual abuse and pornography. 

However, the proposed law also seeks to target broadly defined “hate speech,” leading many Canadians to worry the bill is a trojan horse being used to usher in political censorship.

Moore, as reported by LifeSiteNews on February 27, previously said that the “Online Harms Act” will allow a new “Digital Safety Commission” to conduct “secret Commission hearings” against those found to have violated the new law, which raises “serious concerns for the freedom of expression” of Canadians online.  

According to the bill’s text, Canadians could soon face life imprisonment for certain “hate crimes,” in addition to other years-long prison terms and hefty fines for online posts the government deems as “hate speech” on the basis of gender, race and other categories.

Bill gives overly ‘broad definition’ to the term ‘hateful content’ 

In additional comments to LifeSiteNews about Bill C-63, Moore warned that the bill gives a broad definition to the term “harmful content.” 

“The definition of ‘content that incites violence’ could capture someone encouraging minor property damage in a context where it ‘could cause’ a person to do something that ‘could’ interfere with an ‘essential service, facility or system,’” Moore told LifeSiteNews. 

“Similarly, the definition of ‘content that incites violent extremism or terrorism’ could capture expression that encourages minor property damage in the course of political protest designed to pressure government on a particular issue, if the expression ‘could cause’ a person to do something that ‘could cause’ a ‘serious risk to the health or safety of the public,’” he added.

Moore observed that given Canadians recent experience in dealing with COVID mandates and lockdowns, which “literally banned protests on the basis that they could cause a risk to the health or safety of the public,” it is not hard to see how “these provisions” in Bill C-63 could be used to “censor expression advocating for civil disobedience and, other than minor property damage, peaceful protest.” 

To enforce the proposed law, the bill calls for the creation of a Digital Safety Commission, a digital safety ombudsperson, and the Digital Safety Office. 

The ombudsperson along with the other offices will be charged with dealing with public complaints regarding online content. It will also put forth a regulatory function in a five-person panel “appointed by the government,” whose task will be monitoring internet platform behaviors to hold people “accountable.” 

Moore told LifeSiteNews that Canadians have already seen government “grossly abuse Canadians’ rights and freedoms in the name of preventing harm and ensuring safety (COVID mandates).” He noted that this bill could give a commission of unelected officials a “concerning” amount of “reach” into “Canadians’ lives.”

In addition to Moore, Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Poilievre has also indicated the proposed law may be dangerous, saying earlier this week that the federal government is merely looking for clever ways to enact internet censorship laws.  

On Tuesday in the House of Commons, Poilievre came out in opposition to the Online Harms Act, saying that if the Trudeau government’s goal is to protect children, he should be enforcing criminal laws rather than censoring opinions online.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Daily Caller / 15 hours ago

LNG Farce Sums Up Four Years Of Ridiculous Biden Energy Policy

armed forces / 15 hours ago

Canada among NATO members that could face penalties for lack of military spending

National / 15 hours ago

Canadian gov’t budget report targets charitable status of pro-life groups, churches

Crime

Biden’s ‘preemptive pardons’ would set ‘dangerous’ precedent, constitutional scholar warns

Published on December 19, 2024

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Bob Unruh

Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley warned that preemptive pardons ‘would do precisely what Biden suggests that he is deterring: create a dangerous immunity for presidents and their allies in committing criminal abuses.’

An expert who not only has testified before Congress on the U.S. Constitution but has represented members in court cases is warning about Joe Biden’s speculated agenda to deliver to his friend and supporters preemptive pardons.

It is Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and author of The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage, who wrote, “After years of lying to the American people about the influence-peddling scandal and promising not to consider a pardon for his son, Biden would end his legacy with the ultimate dishonesty: converting pardons into virtual party favors.”

There has been much speculation about those preemptive pardons from Biden, who lied about allowing juries and courts to determine the outcomes of son Hunter’s criminal gun and tax cases, flip-flopped and pardoned him.

Hunter Biden could have been ordered to jail for years for his felony gun convictions and his guilty pleas to felony tax charges.

However, Joe Biden handed him a get-out-of-jail free card, then followed up with hundreds and hundreds more commutations and pardons to a long list of those with criminal convictions.

The activity triggered a rash of speculation about those preemptive pardons, and Turley explains what’s going on.

“Democrats are worried about the collapsing narrative that President-elect Donald Trump will destroy democracy, end future elections, and conduct sweeping arrests of everyone from journalists to homosexuals. That narrative, of course, ignores that we have a constitutional system of overlapping protections that has blocked such abuses for over two centuries.”

Thus, the talk of preemptive pardons, but Turley said it wouldn’t work out.

“Ironically, preemptive pardons would do precisely what Biden suggests that he is deterring: create a dangerous immunity for presidents and their allies in committing criminal abuses,” he said.

He noted if Biden delivers those pardons, “he would fundamentally change the use of presidential pardons by granting ‘prospective’ or ‘preemptive’ pardons to political allies. Despite repeated denials of President-elect Donald Trump that he is seeking retaliation against opponents and his statements that he wants ‘success [to be] my revenge,’ Democratic politicians and pundits have called for up to thousands of such pardons.”

He explained there’s politics all over the scheme.

“After many liberals predicted the imminent collapse of democracy and that opponents would be rounded up in mass by the Trump Administration, they are now contemplating the nightmare that democracy might survive and that there will be no mass arrests,” he wrote. “The next best thing to a convenient collapse of democracy is a claim that Biden’s series of preemptive pardons averted it. It is enough to preserve the narrative in the face of a stable constitutional system.”

But there will be a cost to such a “political stunt,” he said.

“Preemptive pardons could become the norm as presidents pardon whole categories of allies and even themselves to foreclose federal prosecutions. … It will give presidents cover to wipe away any threat of prosecution for friends, donors, and associates. This can include self-pardons issued as implied condemnations of their political opponents. It could easily become the final act of every president to pardon himself and all of the members of his Administration.

“We would then have an effective immunity rule for outgoing parties in American politics.”

He noted that in the past, Bill Clinton pardoned both family members and political donors.

“Yet, despite that history, no president has seen fit to go as far as where Biden appears to be heading,” he said. Promoters of the plan, he said, “would prefer to fundamentally change the use of the pardon power to maintain an apocalyptic narrative that was clearly rejected by the public in this election. If you cannot prove the existence of the widely touted Trump enemies list, a Biden pardon list is the next best thing.”

Reprinted with permission from the WND News Center.

Continue Reading

Alberta

B.C. traveller arrested for drug exportation during Calgary layover

Published on December 16, 2024

By

From the Alberta RCMP

B.C. traveller arrested for drug exportation during Calgary layover

Calgary – On Nov. 17, 2024, Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers at the Calgary International Airport were conducting outbound exams when they intercepted luggage from a commercial flight destined for the United Kingdom. During the exam, officers found and seized 12 kg of pressed cocaine and a tracking device. The owner of the bag was subsequently arrested by CBSA prior to boarding a flight to Heathrow Airport.

The Integrated Border Enforcement Team in Alberta, a joint force operation between the RCMP Federal Policing Northwest Region, CBSA and Calgary Police Service, was notified and a criminal investigation was initiated into the traveller and the seized drugs.

Justin Harry Carl Beck, 29, a resident of Port Coquitlam, B.C., was arrested and charged with:

  • Exportation of a controlled substance contrary to section 6(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act;
  • Possession of a controlled substance for the purpose of trafficking contrary to section 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Beck is scheduled to appear at the Alberta Court of Justice in Calgary on May 6, 2025.

“This seizure is a testament to the exemplary work and investigative expertise shown by CBSA Border Services Officers at Calgary International Airport.  Through our key partnerships with the RCMP and the Calgary Police Service, the CBSA works to disrupt those attempting to smuggle illegal drugs across our borders and hold them accountable.”

  • Janalee Bell-Boychuk, Regional Director General, Prairie Region, Canada Border Services Agency

“The RCMP Federal Policing Northwest Region’s top priority has always been, and will continue to be, public safety. This investigation serves as an important reminder that this extends beyond any border. By working together, we prevented this individual from importing an illicit substance into a foreign country where it had the potential to cause significant harm to others, all for the sake of turning a profit.”

  • Supt. Sean Boser, Officer in Charge of Federal Serious Organized Crime and Border Integrity – Alberta, RCMP Federal Policing Northwest Region

“This investigation underscores the importance of collaboration in drug trafficking investigations. Our partnerships with law enforcement agencies across the country, and internationally, are vital to addressing crimes that cross multiple borders. By intercepting these drugs before they could reach their destination, we have ensured a safer community, both locally and abroad.”

  • Supt. Jeff Bell, Criminal Operations & Intelligence Division, Calgary Police Service

IBET’s mandate is to enhance border integrity and security along the shared border, between designated ports of entry, by identifying, investigating and interdicting persons, organizations and goods that are involved in criminal activities.

Continue Reading

Trending

X