Tuesday, January 29, 2019
It is argued that the neither the approach taken to terrorist speech in Bill C-51 or Bill C-59 is satisfactory. Both offences fail to deal with the problem of calls for people to engage in unspecified generic acts of terrorism as seen in Othman Hamdan’s calls for “lone wolves” “swiftly to activate”. An extensive case study of the Othman Hamdan case is provided including the use of immigration law after his acquittal for counselling murder and other crimes. Hamdan’s acquittal for counselling murder and other offences suggests that the new Bill C-59 terrorist speech offence will likely not reach Hamdan’s internet postings. One coherent response would be to repeal terrorist speech offences while making greater use of court-ordered take downs of such speech, programs to counter violent extremism and surveillance. Another coherent response would be to criminalize the promotion and advocacy of terrorist activities subject to defences specifically designed to protect fundamental freedoms. Unfortunately, neither Bills C-51 or C-59 pursue either of these options.
https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2019/01/roach-on-terrorist-speech.html
Roach on Terrorist Speech curated from CrimProf Blog
No comments:
Post a Comment