For clarity, it's not that.... We don't take a position on section 13. We think that the impetus and the idea behind section 13 are noble ones. Many of the things that were done under section 13, including by our colleague, Richard Warman, were noble causes in many cases. Again, as my esteemed colleague pointed out, they targeted some of the worst offenders.
What we are concerned about, however, is.... First of all, we have many complainants coming to the National Council of Canadian Muslims who are facing all sorts of issues of discrimination. Oftentimes when we tell them to go and file complaints with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, they face significant issues in terms of backlog and in terms of getting fair remedies. Maybe part of it is because this act hasn't been reviewed in 20 years. As online hate grows, as we have more and more self-represented litigants who face real significant challenges, as we have folks in Calgary who walk down the streets and are spit on just for wearing the hijab, and as people face challenges when they go to work and when they go to pray, we need to think about how to update this act. It hasn't been reviewed in almost 20 years. How do we modernize it? How do we make sure that this version of section 13, if we were to consider that, would be effectively balanced against the original concerns that were raised?
This would be an opportunity to really think about how we define hate—and again we summarized this a little more in our brief—and some of the other significant questions that are directly on point with respect to section 13 and the act in its entirety.