Defence of free speech must be absolute: advocate

EDMONTON – There’s not much that seems to faze Alan Borovoy when it comes to his infallible belief in a person’s right to free speech in Canada.

Groups that bash gays, women or religious organizations may be repugnant, but democracies must allow them to speak freely, insists Borovoy, the general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association who will give a speech in Edmonton on Wednesday.

But even for a 40-year veteran of the civil liberties movement, the ideals of free speech can occasionally clash with the realities of one’s heart. For Borovoy, such a clash occurred when the CCLA defended Holocaust-denier Ernst Zundel’s right not to be muzzled.

“I was bothered by the number of Holocaust survivors I knew who would be hurt by what I was saying,” says Borovoy, 75.

“To know the things I was saying were so hurtful to people who had suffered so much already — that bothered me.”

But that’s still no reason not to support Zundel’s rights, he says, immediately afterwards.

As the longtime public voice of the CCLA, Borovoy speaks persuasively and passionately about contemporary attacks on civil liberties in Canada. He has written a handful of books on the topic and lectures widely across the country. And he is funny.

“Do you know why cold weather makes for political stability?” he quips. “Because it’s too cold to demonstrate.”

In the 1960s, Borovoy started working for the Jewish Labour Committee to fight racism against minority groups in Toronto. In the four decades since, critics of his work have shifted along with the country’s political winds.

“At one time, I got it from the right because my stance might have been seen as helping the communists and Trotskyists,” he says.

“If you live long enough, you have the opportunity to experience (criticism) every which way.”

These days, he is likely to be eyed with suspicion by some members of the left who condemn his support for the rights of right-wing political commentators to express their views.

Borovoy has been particularly vocal in denouncing what he views as misuse of the country’s human rights commissions.

He notes two Alberta cases that have attracted media attention — that of Ezra Levant, who is appearing this month before the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission for publishing the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, and that of Rev. Stephen Boissoin, who wrote to a Red Deer newspaper claiming that gays, among other things, are “just as immoral” as pedophiles, drug dealers and pimps.

Levant and Boissoin are accused of promoting hatred towards Muslims and gays, respectively.

Borovoy believes neither case belongs in front of a human rights commission. He speaks from a position of intimacy on the issue, since he helped establish the commissions in the 1960s to stop discrimination against minority groups in the employment and housing sectors.

“Nobody ever thought the commissions would have anything to do with expressions of opinion or the dissemination of news reports. That wasn’t on the table,” he says.

“I think it’s awful that a law could be used to muzzle that kind of expression. That’s the stuff of what democratic polemics are about.”

In his 40 years at the helm of the country’s civil liberties movement, Borovoy has seen other changes, too, in how the Canadian public perceives civil rights issues. During the FLQ crisis, the CCLA spoke out against the invocation of the War Measures Act, and Borovoy recalls a stream of angry phone calls slamming the organization’s stance.

Fast-forward 31 years to government actions taken after 9/11, and reactions were very different, says Borovoy. Most calls to the CCLA supported their position against heavy-handed government intrusion on Canadians’ liberties.

“I can only speculate, but I suspect that it’s probably increased urbanization, increased immigration and communities that have become more heterogeneous (that) has brought with it a greater willingness to question government,” he says.

“And yes, it is positive. It’s important in a democracy.”

http://www.canada.com/topics/technology/story.html?id=449e1994-5d1d-4808-abca-aa7b1f096f66

3 thoughts on “Defence of free speech must be absolute: advocate

  1. Dear Edmonton Jounal,

    “Stephen Boissoin, who wrote to a Red Deer newspaper claiming that gays, among other things, are “just as immoral” as pedophiles, drug dealers and pimps.” Excerpt from “Defence of free speech must be absolute” Edmonton Journal Oct 29, 2008.

    Where did Stephen Boissoin say that? What is the Journal’s source? Not sure why they can’t get it right. It is plain as day that it is about activists…gay, straight, bi whatever but activists nevertheless. Your insinuation is false and would fall under the category of libel.

    Whether you agree with what I said or not, the following excerpt from my 2002 letter to the editor makes it clear that I was not stating what the Journal irresponsibly claims above.

    “Regardless of what you hear, the militant homosexual agenda isn’t rooted in protecting homosexuals from “gay bashing.” The agenda is clearly about homosexual activists that include, teachers, politicians, lawyers, Supreme Court judges, and God forbid, even so-called ministers, who are all determined to gain complete equality in our nation and even worse, our world.

    Don’t allow yourself to be deceived any longer. These activists are not morally upright citizens, concerned about the best interests of our society. They are perverse, self-centered and morally deprived individuals who are spreading their psychological disease into every area of our lives. Homosexual rights activists and those that defend them, are just as immoral as the pedophiles, drug dealers and pimps that plague our communities.”

    Stephen Boissoin
    Red Deer, AB

  2. “Borovoy believes neither case belongs in front of a human rights commission. He speaks from a position of intimacy on the issue, since he helped establish the commissions in the 1960s to stop discrimination against minority groups in the employment and housing sectors.”

    So basically, he helped establish the commissions with the idea that they would only be used to violate people’s freedom of association (i.e. by telling employers who they must hire and landlords who they must rent to), but somehow, they ended up being used to violate people’s freedom of expression as well. What a shocker.

  3. “‘I can only speculate, but I suspect that it’s probably increased urbanization, increased immigration and communities that have become more heterogeneous (that) has brought with it a greater willingness to question government,’ he says.”

    So it’s the disintegration of Canadian society that has brought with it a greater willingness to question government. And it’s guys like Borovoy who have worked tirelessly to bring about that disintegration.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s