AN INSULT TO FREE SPEECH
An
insult to free speech
National Post
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Freedom
of speech does not include the right to have one's views published or broadcast.
Nor does freedom of the press carry with it an obligation to give space to views
opposed to those held by the press' owners or their editors.
Indeed,
the only way that a right to have one's views aired could exist is if the
government restricted the freedom of the press, forcing media outlets to publish
or broadcast material that was deemed otherwise unworthy.
In
other words, such a "right" would exist only if the state assumed the
power to regulate public discourse, which would be anathema to our democratic
ideals.
Apparently,
Khurrum Awan doesn't have much respect for those ideals. A recent graduate of
Osgoode Hall law school in
At
a conference over the weekend, Mr. Awan betrayed just how thoroughly he and his
fellow travellers misunderstand the concept of freedom of speech. He told the
Canadian Arab Federation that Muslims must "demand [the] right to
participate" in national media. "And we have to tell them, you know
what, if you're not going to allow us to do that, there will be consequences.
You will be taken to the human rights commission, you will be taken to the press
council, and you know what? If you manage to get rid of the human rights code
provisions [on hate speech], we will then take you to the civil courts system.
And you know what? Some judge out there might just think that perhaps it's time
to have a tort of group defamation, and you might be liable for a few million
dollars."
That
someone who graduated from law school would issue forth with this hostile jumble
of threats is a sad reflection of our rights-mad age. Apparently, Mr. Awan sees
freedom of speech and freedom of the press as petty concepts to be brushed aside
in the service of identity politics. In his world, the repository of expressive
rights is not the individual, but rather ethnic and religious collectives, whose
members must bully taxpayers and media owners into disseminating their
propaganda.
Look
at his insistence that "you're not going to allow us" -- Muslim
Canadians -- to have access to national media. Who, exactly, is stopping them?
Indeed, through his vexatious complaints against Maclean's, Mr. Awan has
garnered for himself, his cause and the CIC an extraordinary amount of press
coverage. (Indeed, his letter to the editor appears on the opposite page.) Nor
is anyone attempting to stop Mr. Awan from starting his own magazine or
newspaper --or taking advantage of low-cost Internet alternatives such as blogs
and podcasts to get his message out.
Perhaps
what truly irks Mr. Awan is that the CIC's position -- pro-censorship, pro-Islamist,
anti-free speech -- has been so roundly disparaged in the mainstream media. He
doesn't just want his ideas floated in the general Canadian marketplace of
ideas: He wants uncritical acceptance.
Sorry,
but that's not the way things work in
What
Mr. Awan and his benefactors at the CIC want is all the power of the press with
none of the risk or cost. They want the government to help them leverage someone
else's presses for their personal views.
Oh
yes, and while they're at it, they would like to silence and punish those who
disagree with them by having an activist judge create causes of action with
penalties of "a few million dollars."
One
of the reasons this newspaper believes that the powers wielded by human-rights
tribunals should be scaled back is that
If
someone were actively seeking to stir up the worst stereotypes Canadians hold in
regard to the repressive political cultures being imported into