Gavin Howe
In March 2017, the Canadian parliament passed an anti-Islamophobia and religious discrimination motion that called on politicians to condemn anti-Islamic behaviour and rhetoric. The motion caused confusion, with many mistaking it for a bill or a law. While the motion does not change existing laws or create new ones, critics argue that it will encourage legislation that could criminalize speech deemed Islamophobic and impose a Sharia anti-blasphemy law in Canada. However, Canada is actually moving towards abolishing blasphemy laws, joining countries like Denmark and Malta, with the introduction of Bill C-51 in 2017, which repeals blasphemous libel from the Criminal Code.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Passing of an Islamic blasphemy law in Canada | No |
| Canadian parliament passing a motion against Islamophobia and religious discrimination | Yes |
| Confusion regarding the passing of the motion | Yes |
| Opposition to the motion | Yes |
| The motion limiting free speech | Yes |
| Empowering a committee to study Islamophobia | Yes |
| Collection of data on Islamic hate crimes | Yes |
| Classification of criticism of Islam as Islamophobia | Yes |
| Canada's blasphemy law being repealed | Yes |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Canada's parliament passes a motion against Islamophobia
Canada's parliament passed a motion against Islamophobia, known as M-103, on March 24, 2017. The non-binding motion, which passed by a vote of 201 to 91, called on the government to condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination. It also aimed to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear and encourage the collection of data on hate crimes, specifically Islamic 'hate crimes'.
The motion was tabled by Liberal MP Irqa Khalid and sparked months of fierce debate in Canada, including protests from both supporters and detractors. While the motion was supported by all NDP and nearly all Liberal MPs, the majority of Conservative MPs voted against it. The vote also revealed divisions among Liberals and New Democrats, with some MPs, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, absent for the vote.
The main point of contention was the concern that the motion would limit free speech and single out Islam for special treatment. Opponents, including Conservative MP David Anderson, argued that the motion could stifle legitimate criticism of Islam and should include all religions. Anderson proposed an amendment to change the wording to condemn "all forms of systemic racism, religious intolerance, and discrimination of Muslims, Jews, Christians, Sikhs, Hindus, and other religious communities." However, this amendment was rejected by Liberals.
Despite the concerns, supporters of the motion highlighted the need to address rising levels of prejudice and hate crimes against Muslims in Canada. The motion also carried symbolic significance following the deadly mosque shooting in Quebec City on January 29, 2017, where six Muslim men lost their lives.
It is important to clarify that the motion is not a "bill" or a "law" and does not change existing laws or create new ones. Instead, it expresses the opinion of the House and empowers a committee to study the issue of eliminating Islamophobia and collect relevant data.
Becoming a Sports Agent: Law Degree Required?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The motion is not a law and won't limit free speech
In 2017, the Canadian parliament passed an anti-Islamophobia and religious discrimination motion. This motion called on politicians to condemn anti-Islamic behaviour and rhetoric. While the motion does not change existing laws or create new ones, it empowers a committee to study the issue of "eliminating Islamophobia" and the federal government to collect data on Islamic 'hate crimes' for further study.
The motion caused some confusion, with many mistaking it for a "bill" or a "law". However, it is important to note that motions simply express a resolution and do not bind the government to adopt a specific policy or course of action. In contrast, a bill becomes a law when passed by Parliament and can have far-reaching implications for both the government and the public.
Despite this clarification, some opponents of the motion argued that it would limit free speech in the country and single out Islam for special treatment. Leadership contender Andrew Scheer expressed a similar sentiment, stating that the motion "could be interpreted as a step towards stifling free speech and legitimate criticism" of Islam. He also emphasised that the motion was not inclusive, as it singled out only one faith, and asserted his belief in freedom of speech.
In response to these concerns, it is worth noting that Canada has taken steps to protect freedom of speech and conscience. In 2018, the Canadian government introduced Bill C-51, which aimed to repeal blasphemous libel laws and modernise the Criminal Code. This bill passed all three readings in the House of Commons and was well-supported by prominent Canadian organisations dedicated to freedom of speech. Additionally, Canada has joined several countries, including Denmark, Malta, and Ireland, in removing antiquated blasphemy provisions from their legislation. These actions demonstrate Canada's commitment to upholding freedom of speech and ensuring that its laws are compliant with international human rights standards.
How to Stop Obsessing Over Your Sister-in-Law
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The motion empowers a committee to study Islamophobia
In 2017, the Canadian parliament passed a motion that many believed to be a "blasphemy law to protect Islam". The motion, M-103, was passed despite a new Angus Reid poll showing that 71% of Canadians would not have voted for the measure. The poll indicated that only 29% would vote in favour, 42% would vote against, and 29% would abstain.
The motion calls on the government to condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination. Opponents argued that it would limit free speech in the country and single out Islam for special treatment. The term "Islamophobia" is not defined in the motion. While the motion does not change existing laws or create new ones, it does empower a committee to study the issue of "eliminating Islamophobia". It also allows the federal government to collect data on Islamic 'hate crimes' for further study.
The motion caused some confusion, with many mistaking it for a "bill" or a "law". However, the Canadian parliament's guide to private members' motions clarifies that motions are simply expressions of opinion and do not bind the government to adopt a specific policy or course of action. In contrast, a bill becomes law when passed by Parliament and can have far-reaching implications.
Canada has taken steps to abolish blasphemy laws and protect freedom of speech. In 2017, the government introduced Bill C-51, which repealed sections of the Criminal Code related to blasphemous libel. This move was supported by several Canadian organisations dedicated to freedom of speech and conscience. By repealing these sections, Canada joined other countries, including Denmark and Malta, in removing antiquated blasphemy provisions.
Law Enforcement Pistols: Can Citizens Carry Them Legally?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Canada introduces Bill C-51 to repeal blasphemous libel laws
In 2017, the Canadian government introduced Bill C-51 to repeal the blasphemous libel law, which was passed in the House of Commons on December 11, 2017. The bill aimed to repeal several archaic and unconstitutional provisions of the Criminal Code, including the blasphemy law (Section 296) and Section 176, which specifically criminalized threats and violence against the clergy.
The blasphemous libel law, which originated in the common law of England, was an offence of publishing material that exposed the Christian religion to scurrility, vilification, ridicule, and contempt, with the tendency to shock and outrage the feelings of Christians. It had been abolished in England and Wales and repealed in Canada's provinces before being officially repealed at the federal level in 2018.
The repeal of the blasphemy law in Canada followed a national campaign by CFI Canada and Humanist Canada, who lobbied together to abolish the law. Humanist and freethinking groups across Canada launched a Parliamentary e-petition in June 2016, which garnered over 7400 signatures, calling for the repeal of Section 296 of the Criminal Code. The petition stated that the blasphemy law restricted freedom of expression and was inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which protects freedom of expression.
While the repeal of the blasphemy law was generally welcomed by humanists and freethinkers, there was some opposition to the repeal of Section 176, which protected the clergy from threats and violence. Additionally, in 2017, the Canadian parliament passed a separate anti-Islamophobia motion, which caused confusion and concern among some who believed it could limit free speech and single out Islam for special treatment. However, it's important to note that this motion did not change or create new laws but empowered a committee to study the issue of Islamophobia and collect data on Islamic hate crimes.
Renting In-Law Apartments: Legal or Not?
You may want to see also
Canada joins other countries in removing blasphemy provisions
In 2017, the Canadian parliament passed an anti-Islamophobia and religious discrimination motion. This motion called on politicians to condemn anti-Islamic behaviour and rhetoric. However, it did not change existing laws or create new ones. Instead, it empowered a committee to study the issue of Islamophobia and the federal government to collect data on Islamic hate crimes.
Despite this, the motion caused confusion in Canada, with many believing it to be a "bill" or a "law". Some critics argued that the motion would limit free speech in the country and single out Islam for special treatment. The term "Islamophobia" is also not defined in the motion.
Canada is not alone in facing these challenges. In recent years, several countries have grappled with the issue of blasphemy laws and the balance between protecting religious groups and safeguarding free speech.
In 2019, 40% of the world's countries and territories had blasphemy laws in place. These laws vary widely in their penalties, from fines to prison sentences and, in some cases, even lashings or execution. However, some countries have taken steps to remove blasphemy provisions. For example, New Zealand repealed its long-standing blasphemy law in 2019, and Greece also repealed its blasphemy law that same year following campaigns by human rights activists. Additionally, in 2018, the Labour Party in New Zealand introduced a Crimes Amendment Bill that included the repeal of blasphemous libel, which passed with unanimous support in 2019. These actions demonstrate a growing trend towards removing blasphemy provisions and protecting freedom of speech.
Lawyers' Guide to Printing on Iron Transfer Paper
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
No. In 2017, the Canadian parliament passed an anti-Islamophobia and religious discrimination motion, which was misinterpreted as a law. The motion encouraged legislation that would criminalize Islamophobic speech.
An Angus Reid poll showed that 71% of Canadians would not have voted for the measure. The poll also found that only 29% would vote in favor, with 42% voting against and 29% abstaining.
The motion called on politicians to condemn anti-Islamic behavior and rhetoric. It also called on the government to "condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination."
The motion was not a bill or a law, but it did empower a committee to study the issue of Islamophobia and the federal government to collect data on Islamic hate crimes.
