Updated Fri. Jun. 6 2008 10:53 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
Controversial author and social commentator Mark Steyn said Friday he wants to lose his case before the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal in Vancouver. Instead, Steyn wants to take the "hate speech" case to an actual court of law.
Steyn said a negative ruling would allow the case to go forward in the legal system -- instead of being heard by what he has called a panel of "pretend judges."
The tribunal is wrapping up a case brought by a member of the Canadian Islamic Congress "on behalf of Muslim residents in the province of British Columbia" against Maclean's magazine. They claim a book excerpt by Steyn republished in the national news magazine in October 2006 promoted hate against Muslims.
In his closing arguments to the panel, the complainants' lawyer, Faisal Joseph, said Steyn's article portrayed Muslims in a contemptuous fashion without offering an alternative point of view.
"There has never been a case in this country where there has been such clear, concise evidence of hatred," he said.
The complainants say Maclean's forced the tribunal showdown because the magazine wouldn't print their response. They want the tribunal to order the magazine to publish a counterpoint.
Maclean's has said the group wants a 5,000-word response, with control over editing and even the magazine's cover. The magazine has said it published 27 letters to the editor in the article's wake.
The Maclean's article presents a scenario about a future in Europe dominated by Muslims. It jumps from arguing about the ordered achievements of colonialism on "Injun" countries to a possible apocalyptic future envisioned in such novels as P.D. James' "The Children of Men."
Unlike Africa, which Steyn dismissed as a "tribal" continent "riddled with AIDS," the Islamic world poses a threat to the West because it is younger and more energetic, he argued. The article -- entitled "The Future Belongs to Islam" -- then quotes a European imam who allegedly said Muslims are reproducing like "mosquitoes."
Other commentators have said Steyn's demographic claims are way off-base.
Steyn and others -- including editors at Maclean's -- have said the issue is not the article's merits or its viewpoint. They are concerned that such human rights tribunals could suppress free speech because the law as written doesn't even allow truth or fair comment as defences.
Maclean's did not present witnesses in its own defence because it did not want to legitimize the process.
Critics say the tribunal's ruling, when it comes, could have broader implications.
"The danger would be to artistic expression, to academic publications, (and) to material that might even be intended to show discrimination," said Noa Mendelsohn of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
In a Thursday appearance on CTV's Mike Duffy Live, Steyn claimed his article was harmless.
"As they say in Hollywood, no British Columbia Muslims were harmed in the making of my magazine article," he said, making a reference to the use of animals in Hollywood movies.
"(The tribunal hearings are) the inversion of every single critical legal principle, including due process, admissibility of evidence, and even the presumption of innocence."
|
