Nova Scotia’s “Cyber-Safety Act”: Section 13 on steroids?

“The act empowers courts to issue “cyberbullying prevention orders” after someone complains.  This includes entering someone’s property, seizing laptops or cellphones, shutting off someone’s Internet for a year and more. Parents can be punished if they haven’t set Internet and texting rules favoured by the courts.  And while the alleged bully can appeal, the conditions still hold throughout the appeals process. Violating the act comes with hefty penalties — including various fines and jail time.”

The above is taken from Anthony Furey’s article “Law makes cyberbullies of us all” appearing in the Toronto Sun on August 13th, 2013.

It seems to me that in much the same way that the “anti-bullying” bandwagon was used as a wedge to drive homosexual indoctrination and propaganda into Ontario’s educational system, Nova Scotia’s new “anti-bullying” legislation, the Cyber-Safety Act, will effectively be used as an excuse to replace the notorious “Section 13“ by exchanging “bullying behaviour” for “hurt feelings”.

For example, the Act defines cyberbullying as “…any electronic communication … that is intended or ought reasonably be expected to cause fear, intimidation, humiliation, distress or other damage or harm to another person’s health, emotional well-being, self-esteem or reputation…” and adds that definition to the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act.

Nova Scotia’s courts are now empowered to issue “cyberbullying prevention orders” after someone complains, and as I read it, that need not necessarily be the victim or the victim’s parents.

Section 8 allows for a “Justice” to issue a protection order based on “the balance of probabilities” without any kind of hearing being involved other than to examine the evidence presented.

The alleged offender will then be be notified of the limitations imposed upon them, and only then can they defend themselves – but the limitations imposed will not be lifted until they have proved their innocence, as section 14 (2) states that “An appeal does not operate as a stay of proceedings, and the protection order under appeal may be enforced as though no appeal were pending unless a judge of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia or the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal otherwise orders.”

Section 25 amends the Education Act “for the purpose of fostering an orderly and safe learning environment”, and requires educational institutions to “co-operate with Government departments and agencies to promote and encourage safe and respectful electronic communications”.

“Safe and respectful” indeed!!!  Who will interprete what is “safe” and “respectful”, particularly  when small children and minors are involved?  In my post “Britain’s ‘Looney Left’ school system brands 3 year-olds as racist” I quoted a Daily Mail article as follows:

“More than 20,000 pupils aged 11 or younger were last year put on record for so-called hate crimes… Some of them are even from nursery schools where children are no older than three… if schools are asked for a pupil reference by a future employer or a university, the record could be used as the basis for it, meaning the pettiest of incidents has the potential to blight a child for life.”

The only “good” thing about this legislation is that it does not appear to have any pretensions about being applicable outside its own jurisdiction.  And that is not too outlandish a thought, as  in his article “Repeal of section 13” appearing in the Toronto Sun on July 7th, Alan Shanoff tells us that “Any item thought to be hate speech can be the subject of a human rights complaint in Saskatchewan, British Columbia or Alberta provided that the item is accessible on the Internet in one of those provinces.” (Emphasis added).

Just how long do we have before some aggrieved member of a “minority group” decides to test the limits of the Cyber-Safety Act by trying to apply it to their own tender feelings and anti-White agenda?  If such a precedent were to be set, can we can expect one or more “serial plaintiffs” to come out of the woodwork, as was the case with Section 13?

Personally, I am inclined to believe anything in this politically-correct mad-house called Canada these days.

Jeff Goodall.

Read Anthony Furey’s article here.

The full text of the Cyber-Safety Act can be read here.

See my post “Hate law illogical” (Shanoff quote) here.

See my post “Britain’s ‘Looney Left’ school system brands 3 year-olds as racist” here.

See also “Cyber-Safety Act: The Department of Bad Facebook Comments?” (Aug. 17th) here.