I’ve listened carefully to what Minister of Justice and Attorney General Sean Fraser and his Liberal colleagues have said in recent weeks about Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act.

To these ears, their core argument can be boiled down to a simple colloquial phrase: just trust me, bro.

Overlook that unprecedented scores of Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Sikh institutions have published potent statements rebuking a bill – soon to be passed in the House of Commons – armed with an amendment that expunges the religious speech defence from Section 319 of the Criminal Code.

Advertisement

And just ignore how a formidable number of legal experts, civil society organizations and advocacy groups are standing in solidarity with these faith leaders.

Both Fraser and MP Kevin Lamoureux have downplayed C-9’s potential to erode freedom of expression by accusing the Conservative Party and their allies of “spreading misinformation” and whipping up individuals and entities into an unreasonable uproar over this bill.

Their claim is that the legislation will not create the latitude for hate speech charges against individuals or religious bodies and that religious expression remains robustly protected in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

That argument is not going to fly.

For one, we’ve seen Charter protections breached through Quebec’s Bill 21 and the federal government’s unjustified – as declared by the courts – use of the Emergencies Act to crack down on the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests, among other examples.

Second, figures who comprise entities such as the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) and the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) have superior credentials to parliamentarians for judging the ramifications of this bill’s potential chilling effects on sincere faith-driven speech.

Also, how can you expect people of faith to blindly trust that Canadians hostile to their views will resist the temptation to silence their opponents through ideological lawfare?

Advertisement

Minister Fraser apparently consulted with Canadian faith organizations on multiple occasions in recent months. These meetings were a golden opportunity to dispel concerns, clear up “misinformation,” and gain support. The failure to get these groups on board with the bill’s agenda is on him.

According to the statement from the NCCM featuring 354 signatories, they “worked with optimism that the text of the bill could be amended to assuage our concerns.” The council then declared “that while we have heard a number of commitments to that end, in our view, the final text of the amendments does match what was committed to.”

The Register heard similar sentiments expressed by the Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL) and the Christian Legal Fellowship (CLF).

So, the minister promises to provide certainty to religious groups through further amendments to Bill C-9, but then offers a “solution” –Liberal MP Patricia Lattanzio’s amendment – that apparently fails to live up to this pledge and seemingly creates more uncertainty, and he wants people of faith to just trust him?

No, trust must be earned through sincere follow-through of promises.

The one agreement concerning this bill that the Liberal Party is holding fast to is the one made with the Bloc Québécois to repeal the exemption protecting good-faith religious arguments from being considered hate speech. It’s unfortunate that this deal of political expediency is trumping a chorus of millions to decry the undermining of democratic norms and civil liberties.

And it really doesn’t inspire confidence that the former chair of the justice and human rights committee, Marc Miller, who is now the Canadian culture and identity minister, said on Oct. 30: “Clearly, there are situations in these texts where these statements are hateful. They should not be used to invoke, or be a defence, and there should perhaps be discretion for prosecutors to press charges.”

To conclude on an optimistic note: the Senate will hopefully provide a forum to make the truly needed amendments to Bill C-9. After all, Fraser himself forecast this possibility during remarks he made in advance of the March 10 vote to close committee debate on this legislation because of Conservative “filibustering and obstructing.”

Advertisement

He said, “there will be additional opportunities to put this matter to a vote, not only in the House of Commons but, of course, for our colleagues in the Senate to consider the bill and to propose amendments as they see fit.”

Fraser can regain trust on this file through concrete actions.  For one, he can accept any potential amendments made by the Senate that manifestly reinforce freedom of religious expression without politically calculated pushback. And he can follow through on any future promise made to communities of faith without equivocation.