article Open access

Should Hate Speech be Criminalized? Lessons from the Canadian experience in R v. Zundel and R v. Keegstra

  • FIU Law Review
Research footprint

At a glance

Citations
0
References
2
Comments
0
Paper overview

Abstract

There is a global trend toward increased use of criminal law to combat hate speech. In assessing this trend, one should be mindful of the experience of countries that have long had criminal laws targeting harmful expression. Canada is one such country. Using the leading Canadian cases of R v. Zundel and R v. Keegstra, this article argues that the Canadian experience suggests the criminal law is a flawed mechanism for countering harmful expression. This is so for at least three reasons. First, hate-speech prosecutions may undermine the group dignity and sense of inclusion of minority groups. Second, criminal laws against hate speech do not serve the primary objectives of criminal justice. Third, hate-speech trials may impede the search for truth, a fundamental purpose of the criminal process.

Record transparency

Publication details

DOI
10.25148/lawrev.19.3.6
OpenAlex
W4410992345
Document type
article
Language
EN
Source
FIU Law Review
Last metadata update
Community

Comments

Log in to join the discussion.

  1. No comments yet. Start the discussion.