Justice Committee on May 9th, 2019

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Farooq, I wonder if you could comment on my question.

[Mustafa Farooq]

First of all, on your question, I think it's a very important question because one of the things I learned when I was in law school was that the law has difficulty keeping up with the logarithmic growth of new technology. That's why we think a parliamentary study specifically on the question of regulating social media companies should be initiated. That could explore these kinds of questions: How do we deal with ISPs? How do we deal with local content? How do we deal with transnational issues?

These are very complicated questions where we need the best minds in Canada to be getting together and thinking about these questions in a very specific way so that we're not curtailing the rights and freedoms of Canadians who use social media companies. We know that the vast majority of Canadians, especially young Canadians, are on social media companies. That's why it's very important that, when we think of bringing in regulatory changes, it's dealt with appropriately.

If you'd like, I can expand on the section 13 question or we can pass it along.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

We're fine. We have less than a minute left.

Mr. Labidi, do you have any comments?

[Mohamed Labidi]

I'll give the floor to Mr. Essid.

[Seifeddine Essid, Social Media Officer, Centre culturel islamique de Québec]

Our brief focuses on the distinction between the virtual world and the physical world. A crime in the physical world should be a crime in the virtual world. This first basic concept must be incorporated into the legislation so that the legislation is up to date with technology.

The other notion is deterrence. There were threats to bomb mosques in Quebec City. The person who made these statements was arrested and then released. If we compare the comments before and after this arrest, we can see a significant amount of moderation in the comments of the person and the people in their circle. Any actions can produce positive results.

We must take action. We made a distinction between legislative measures and the measures that platforms should take. We must take action on platforms, including Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, but also in the various mass media. We're seeing some disparities in the violence of comments in these media—which I won't name—but it's not the same thing. The commenting policies are probably different. That's why we said that the CRTC could help by regulating not the commenting rules, but the moderation mechanism on Facebook pages, in particular. As you know, we can moderate comments on a website in a preventive way, whereas on a Facebook page, we suffer a little damage.

I would like to talk about the specific experience of people who have made an effort—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Could you just wrap up in 15 seconds?

[Seifeddine Essid]

Okay.

They reported comments, which led to the withdrawal of publications in a mass media entity. This small action by individuals produced results. I think that Parliament could provide more tools and, above all, mandates for law enforcement agencies.

Thank you.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Thank you very much.

We'll now turn to Ms. Khalid.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming in and sharing your experiences with us. I will go to Mr. Farber first.

Mr. Farber, you spoke about some of the challenges that exist for CHRC in really implementing its mandate, and Mr. Farooq spoke about opening up the CHRA for a legislative review. What kinds of benefits could we receive going through such an exercise? Would this be an opportunity, then, to strengthen the tools for CHRC? What kinds of tools would CHRC need in order to be effective?

[Bernie M. Farber]

I'm a huge proponent of reviewing law and order to create tools necessary to fight hatred. As I said, we've moved beyond hateful words, which are bad enough, to terrible, violent, hateful actions, and we are way behind. I think there needs to be a two-pronged approach.

We do have a section of law that's a little problematic, and that's why it went through a whole repeal process back in 2012. However, let's remember that the Supreme Court of this land found section 13 to be constitutional. The government of the day still went ahead and repealed it and took away a tool that we desperately need if we're going to get even close to being even with the game.

My suggestion is that we take Mr. Farooq's suggestion in terms of a review that will give us ongoing protection down the line, and that we also look at an immediate way of returning section 13—or a facsimile thereof—tweaked to ensure it doesn't cause any more administrative issues but is available for us to use. Right now, we have only one tool and that is subsection 319(2) of the Criminal Code. It's kind of like taking a cannon to kill a fly, when we could use a civil remedy that we know works quite well.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Farooq, you spoke about section 13 and the fact that you didn't agree with its contents. Is there some amended language that you would like to see addressed if there is a new section 13 that's drafted?

[Mustafa Farooq]

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.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you.

I'll turn the discussion around a little bit, to social medial platforms.

Mr. Farber, you mentioned that you do have a current method of removing—or trying to advocate for the removal of—what you and what real people identify as hate groups on social media platforms like Facebook and perhaps Twitter. What is your current method and how successful are you in it?

Then I'll turn to Ms. Zine and get her commentary on that process.

[Bernie M. Farber]

I'm not going to tell you the method because then we won't be able to use it anymore. Suffice it to say that we have researchers who go online and are able to assess the kind of violent language that's used. We expose it publicly. Of course, most of that language crosses a criminal line. Of the three that we have exposed, all have been shut down.

This includes the largest, called “This Hour has 88 Minutes”. It's a podcast. The “88” was standing for the 8th letter of the alphabet, “H”, so 88 is “HH” meaning “Heil Hitler”. It was a neo-Nazi podcast that had over 25,000 listeners in Canada and we don't know how many thousands outside of Canada. We were able to shut it down once we were able to get the information out there and actually expose the people doing it.

We're one small group with a very limited budget. You can imagine that if we could work with intelligence groups, with the police in co-operation.... There are certain things we can do that the police can't do and vice versa, but nobody is co-operating. Everybody is working on their own little schtick and what happens is that hate takes the lead.

We have to find ways to work with CSIS, with local police and with the RCMP. It has to be a coordinated effort. Until that happens, I think we're going to be in really dire straits.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Thank you.

You've out of time, Ms. Khalid.

Mr. Garrison.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.

I'm very pleased to be on the justice committee today, because as a member of the LGBTQ community, we're all in this together. Hate spreads like wildfire, as Mr. Farber said, and if we don't combat it collectively, we will all suffer.

This also reminds me that not only is the law behind the technology; Parliament is always behind the community. In my community, I was very pleased to join more than 400 Victorians in a hands around the mosque event for Friday prayers. I want to give credit to the mosques across British Columbia that held an open mosque day. In my community, in Victoria, a thousand members of the community showed up to learn more about Islam.

The community is responding in positive ways on education. Organizations like Mr. Farber's are helping with enforcement, but we have to do more collectively, as the government, to combat this. I just heard one person the last week, in my community, saying they didn't feel safe going to the synagogue in Victoria, and another saying very much that they did not go to the mosque for Friday prayers. That's a serious problem in our communities.

I was very interested to hear many of you mention the question of resources. I want to ask Mr. Essid and Mr. Labidi, if there are more resources to be provided from government, what would be your priority? Where should more resources go first?

[Mohamed Labidi]

Personally, I believe that establishing a squad to track down hate messages on the Internet will be a priority. Immediately after the tragedy of January 29, we continued to receive hate messages. We're still receiving them to this day. So there's a problem somewhere. It's up to you, as legislators, to find ways to address this issue and to identify a solution to limit the spread of hate messages over the Internet.

[Seifeddine Essid]

I would add that we need a clear definition of what constitutes “hate,” as Ms. Zine said. This definition would draw the line between legal and illegal activity. From that point on, the law enforcement agencies will have a free hand to take action. There's also the prevention aspect. Since CSIS is involved in a number of cases where, unfortunately, evil prevails, it could include this area in its prevention research.

Thank you.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thanks very much.

I want to put the same question to others, because I know that the mandate of the justice committee is to work on legislation, but I think on the question of resources, it's something that could happen now.

Maybe I'll start with Mr. Farber. How would you have the government prioritize this?

[Bernie M. Farber]

The resources have to go to two places. They have to go to protecting places of worship. There already is a resource available that the government has set forth and that synagogues and mosques are taking advantage of. It's a slow process to get that, but even putting cameras outside doors and potentially hiring security guards costs a lot of money.

I know we don't like it. I know we don't like to see guards at our places of worship, but if that could prevent one death, I think it's worth the cost. That's the first place.

Second, I really go back to the legislation that's already in place. There is legislation in place under the Canadian Human Rights Act that deals with, and can potentially deal with, online hatred through social media. I mentioned it in my address. My fear is that the Canadian Human Rights Commission just doesn't have the proper resources to even apply the law right now. A review has to be undertaken but it has to be done quickly.

If I can get you to understand anything, it's that we're not just behind, but we're way behind. I never would have dreamed that it would be possible in 2019 to fear that if I walk into my synagogue, I could be shot down. It's just unimaginable to me, yet it happened and it happened in this country.

My biggest fear, when I was with the Canadian Jewish Congress, back in the early 2000s, was that some gunman would walk into a synagogue. It didn't happen until 2017 but it happened, and I believe it will happen again, sadly, unless we get ahead of the ball. If that means finding the resources, we must find the resources.

Secure the buildings, first and foremost. Put the other resources toward limiting online hate. Those are the two things that have to be done yesterday.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

You have one minute left, Mr. Garrison.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

I'll just ask the other two members quickly: Mr. Farooq and then Ms. Zine.

[Mustafa Farooq]

Before I pass to Dr. Zine.... One of the recommendations we were asking for in the end was to look at creating specific language around a long-standing and continued grant program so that resources could be delivered to, for example, training hate crime units across Canada on how to counter online hate and how to lay charges.

The Fort McMurray mosque has been targeted numerous times, as we lay out in our brief, with threats to burn it down, including very recently after the New Zealand attacks, when folks were posting in Canada about having a pig roast at the mosque—really disgusting and abhorrent things. To our knowledge, no charges have been filed against the perpetrators.

In large part it has to do with a lack of training and also the very high threshold of the Criminal Code, but obviously, training around how to interpret and how to lay charges under the Criminal Code and section 319 would be helpful.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Professor Zine, please answer very briefly.

[Dr. Jasmin Zine]

I'll echo the sentiments expressed earlier about the need for a broader form of critical media literacy as well. Many nations have been very active. I've worked with the Council of Europe on some of the initiatives they've had going on for the last 10 years on anti-hate campaigns. They've worked very successfully by bringing youth together from across the European Union to make them more aware and encourage counter-speech, and to have an emphasis on the communities that have been targeted by hate and help them to be able to come forward. We know these cases are under-reported. Stats Canada revealed that between 2010 and 2017, police reported 374 cases of cyber-related hate crimes, but we know there are far more than that.

There needs to be an empowering of the vulnerable and marginalized communities experiencing this to be able to bring their cases forward, to be heard and to have swift action based on that.