The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has issued a ruling against a Canadian man for posting anti-semitic content on a Google newsgroup in violation of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Canadian Human Rights Commission, which enforces Tribunal rulings, wrote to Google to advise the company of the decision.
The Commission acknowledged that there was no order against Google but "encouraged" it to remove the offending content from the newsgroup. Interestingly, word of the decision does not come from the Tribunal or Commission, but rather through the Chilling Effects website, which posts complaints received by Google to remove content.
Stuck between a rock and inaction
This issue leaves me feeling unsettled. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal seems to have a moral duty to act on but is legaly powerless to do so? I am curious whether the CHRT’s hands are tied due to a jurisdictional issue or an internet law issue. What would have happened if the same comments had been in print and published in Canada?
I’d like to understand the relationship (if one exists) with respect to comment and opinion offered vis-à-vis criticism of government policies of the State of Israel as opposed to criticism levelled at Jewish people.
Aren’t these distinctively different entities under law?
Not all people in Israel are Jews and not all Jews support the policies of the Sharon government.
I’m as equally disturbed by the growing trend on Internet sites across Canada in particular that appear to be granting tacit approval for inculcating distrust and prejudice against people identified as “Middle Eastern” in national or ethnic origin.
One can’t reasonably strive to identify address and eradicate discrimination and prejudice on a case-by-case basis. Every abuse and the toleration of abuse by Canadians and the Canadian government authority charged with monitoring discriminatory practices must approach these kinds of practices with a broader scope.