Justice Minister Virani Responds to Musk’s Criticism of Online Harms Act

Justice Minister and Attorney General of Canada Arif Virani takes part in an interview in Ottawa on Dec. 13, 2023. The Canadian Press/Sean Kilpatrick

Canada’s justice minister is defending Ottawa’s Online Harms Act after Elon Musk criticized the bill online.

“It looks like you agree that we all have a responsibility to protect free expression by stopping the worst kinds of hate speech,” Arif Virani said in a March 12 post on X.

The post included text from the platform’s Help Center, with a section highlighted that said, “We recognize that if people experience abuse on X, it can jeopardize their ability to express themselves.”

Mr. Virani also criticized an article that Mr. Musk shared about the proposed legislation.

“The article you shared is misleading. I’d be happy to discuss our legislation and how X can work with us to help keep kids safe and stop hatred.”

The comments were in reaction to a March 12 post by Mr. Musk saying, “This is insane,” referring to an article titled “Canadian law would allow judges to hand down life sentences for “speech crimes” (no, this isn’t a joke).” The article was on Not The Bee, a self-described news and entertainment website with actual news “that seems like it should definitely be satire.”

This isn’t the first time that Mr. Virani has had to defend the bill on social media. Author Margaret Atwood also criticized it in a March 8 post on X, while linking to a CTV News article about the bill.

“If this account of the bill is true, it’s Lettres de Cachet all over again,” she said, referencing a practice in 17th and 18th century France that allowed the king to authorize an arrest. “The possibilities for revenge false accusations + thoughtcrime stuff are sooo inviting! Trudeau’s Orwellian online harms bill.”

Mr. Virani said in response, “Grateful for your interest in the Online Harms Act—which would keep kids safe, apply existing laws to the online world and address the rise in hate—but the article you’ve shared mischaracterizes the bill.” He didn’t elaborate how the article mischaracterizes the bill in his post.

The Online Harms Bill would amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to specify that posting “hate speech” online is discrimination. It would allow people to file complaints with the Canadian Human Rights Commission against the individual who posted the content poster. In some cases, complaints could be filed anonymously if the commission deems it necessary.

Online social media platforms would be required to act responsibly, protect children, and make certain content inaccessible. Failure to abide by the requirements could cost the platforms 6 percent of their gross global revenue or $10 million, whichever is greater.

The bill also paves the way for what some critics have called “future crime” provisions, where a judge could place certain restrictions on a defendant for up to a year if the court is satisfied that the individual may commit a future hate crime. Some of the restrictions include wearing an electronic bracelet and curfews. Defendants who refuse could be sentenced for up to one year in jail.

Lawyers have raised alarms about these and other aspects of the legislation to The Epoch Times, such as the appointment of a Digital Safety Commission to police online content, the amount of power the commission would have, and concerns of self-censorship by online users not wanting to risk getting on the wrong side of the law.

Tara MacIsaac and Omid Ghoreishi contributed to this report.