Catalogue de la bibliothèque

Mon panier

Terrorist babble and the limits of the law : assessing a prospective Canadian terrorism glorification offense / Craig Forcese & Kent Roach.

Cette page Web a été archivée dans le Web

L’information dont il est indiqué qu’elle est archivée est fournie à des fins de référence, de recherche ou de tenue de documents. Elle n’est pas assujettie aux normes Web du gouvernement du Canada et elle n’a pas été modifiée ou mise à jour depuis son archivage. Pour obtenir cette information dans un autre format, veuillez communiquer avec nous.

Localisation

Kanishka

Ressource

Livres électroniques

Titre alternatif

Assessing a prospective Canadian terrorism glorification offense

Auteurs

Publié

  • [Vancouver, B.C.] : TSAS, 2015.

Bibliographie

Includes bibliographical references.

Description

1 online resource (47 pages)

Note

Authors affiliated with: Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa ; Faculty of Law, University of Toronto.
"TSAS is supported as a national strategic initiative funded by SSHRC and Public Safety Canada, along with the following departments of the federal government: Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC), Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)".

Résumé

"Since 2007, the Canadian government has repeatedly expressed interest in a terrorism “glorification” offence, responding to internet materials regarded by officials as terrorist propaganda and as promoting “radicalization”. In the wake of the October 2014 attacks, this idea clearly remains on the government’s shortlist of responses. This article addresses the merits of such a criminal offence. It include analyses of: the sociological data concerning radicalization and “radicalization to violence”; existing offences that apply to speech associated with terrorism; comparative experience with glorification crimes; and, the restraints that the Charter would place on any similar Canadian law. The article concludes that a glorification offence would be ill-suited to Canada’s social and legal environment. This is especially true for Charter purposes, given the less restrictive alternative of applying existing terrorism and other criminal offences to hate speech and speech that incites, threatens or facilitates terrorism. There is concern that new glorification offences could have counter-productive practical public safety effects. Instead, it is recommended that modest amendments be made to the existing criminal law allowing the government to respond effectively to speech that is already criminal under existing Canadian terrorism or other criminal offences. Specifically, a carefully constructed means of deleting (or at least “hiding”) the most dangerous forms of already criminal internet speech is favoured."--Includes text from Abstract.

Sujet

Accès en ligne

Contenu

Abstract -- Introduction -- Part I. Radicalization and terrorist violence -- A. Patterns of terrorist radicalization -- B. The internet and terrorist radicalization -- C. Discussion -- Part II. Legal response to terrorist radicalization -- A. Existing provisions -- B. Glorification offences -- Part III. Glorification crimes and constitutional protection of free expression -- A. Free speech protection -- B. Attempts to justify a new glorification offence under Section 1 -- C. An alternative proposal -- Conclusion.

Collection

Working paper series (TSAS) ; no. 15-02 (Jan. 2015)

Date de modification :