www.freedomsite.org | Online Store  

 

Contents



Contact us!

 

152 Carlton Street

PO Box 92545

Toronto, Ontario

M5A 2K1

Canada

 

E-mail Us

 

 


Canadian Association For Free Expression

 


 

 

 

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

 

Tribunal Decisions

 

Rulings in the case of Marc Lemire Vs. Human Rights Enforcers 

 

Issues being Ruled on by Tribunal Ruling in Favor of English French
Ruling on Location of Tribunal Hearing

 

February 22, 2006

 

Positions of parties:

 

Marc Lemire:  Wants the tribunal in Oakville, Burlington or Milton.  This is close to where the Witnesses are and my safety is at risk in Toronto due to groups that are associated with the complainant.  At a previous hearing in Toronto, we were followed and harassed by this group.

 

CHRC/Warman: Warman wanted the hearing in Toronto because he has access to cheap accommodation and public transit. It would be too financially hard to have the hearings outside of Toronto.  Warman suggests possibly Kingston, Ontario as a mid way point between Toronto and Ottawa

 

Note: Warman is being called as a witness by the CHRC and his expenses will be paid by the taxpayers. Keep that in mind when reading his arguments about his costs.

 

Canadian Human Rights Commission and Richard Warman [PDF format]

 

[HTML Format]

[PDF format]
Ruling on Interested parties

 

February 23, 2006

 

Positions of parties:

 

Marc Lemire: We are opposed to the intervention of the Canadian Jewish Congress, B'Nai Brith, Simon Wiesenthal Centre.  It would unfairly lengthen the hearing.  Run up the amount of money it would cost me. Support the intervention of CAFE and CFSL.

 

CHRC/Warman: They Agree to the Jewish groups intervention

 

Canadian Human Rights Commission, Richard Warman, Canadian Jewish Congress, B'Nai Brith, Simon Wiesenthal Centre  [PDF format]

 

[HTML Format]

 

[PDF format]
Ruling on Amendment of Sexual Orientation to complaint

 

March 14, 2006

 

Positions of parties:

 

CHRC/Warman: Request to add the grounds of "discrimination" of Sexual orientation to the complaint against me

 

Marc Lemire:  If the CHRC is granted this motion, we request make further submissions on the Constitutional Motion

 

Canadian Human Rights Commission and Richard Warman [PDF format]

 

[HTML Format]

[PDF format]
Additional Particluars

 

August 16, 2006

 

Positions of parties:

 

Marc Lemire:  “further particulars and disclosure” from the Complainant, Richard Warman, and the Canadian Human Rights Commission. on Constitutional issues.

 

CHRC/Warman: no

 

Partly Marc Lemire and 

partly Warman / CHRC

[PDF format]
Adding Richard Warman as a respondent

 

October 26, 2006

 

Positions of parties:

 

Marc Lemire: With the present motion, Mr. Lemire is in effect attempting to introduce his own human rights complaint against Mr. Warman. He is claiming that Mr. Warman wrote and posted hate messages of his own on the very same website, freedomsite.org. Mr. Lemire argues that Mr. Warman should therefore be added as an additional respondent in the present case.

 

CHRC/Warman: no

 

Canadian Human Rights Commission and Richard Warman [PDF format]
CHRC Motion for disclosure

 

November 29, 2006

 

Positions of parties:

 

CHRC/Warman: “All information within the possession of Marc Lemire without exception of entire contents of his website which he administers, as well as all the literature (books) referred to on this website and the entire website including all additions (such as information regarding the Commission’s announced expert) to it since September 24, 1999 and up to date on the date of the hearing” (sic throughout).

 

Marc Lemire: no

 

 

 

Canadian Human Rights Commission and Richard Warman

 

 

and in a very small way, Marc Lemire for not having to disclosure this:

 

“All materials, transcripts, statements, speeches from other hearings or from

elsewhere that the Respondent has in his possession”.

[PDF format]

 

Motion to dismiss case against Marc Lemire

 

December 6, 2006

 

Positions of parties:

 

Marc Lemire: Mr. Lemire has made a motion seeking the dismissal of the complaint. He alleges that the Statements of Particulars of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Mr. Warman do not set out material facts sufficient to allow him to give full answer and defence.

 

CHRC/Warman: no

 

Canadian Human Rights Commission and Richard Warman [PDF format]
Motion to allow a new expert witness, and update Statement of Particulars

 

January 3, 2003

 

Positions of parties:

 

Marc Lemire: Mr. Lernire is therefore authorized to file the expert's report of Dr. Persinger, which was already communicated to the other parties, 1 gather, on or about December 13, 2006. This will enable Mr. Lemire to call Dr. Persinger to testify as an expert witness,

 

CHRC/Warman: opposed

 

Marc Lemire [PDF format]

 

 

 

What is the Canadian "Human Rights" Tribunal?

 

The Canadian "Human Rights" Tribunal (CHRT) is a systematically biased quasi-judicial hearing. As clear evidence on how biased the tribunal is, every ruling so far in the case has been against Marc Lemire.

 

Many people that have seen the Tribunal in action have referred to it as a Kangaroo Court.  They conduct Show Trials on behalf of the Commission.  

 

 

The Canadian "Human Rights" Tribunal has ruled:

  • Truth is no defence
  • Intent is no defence 
  • Fair comment is no defence 

    In fact there are ZERO defences available

     

  • Any evidence is allowed (hearsay, double hearsay) 
  • They do not need to show any proof of actual harm of the messages complained of 
  • Standard of proof is very low and is based on a “balance of probabilities” not “beyond a reasonable doubt”

     

The Canadian "Human Rights" Tribunal trying to act like a real court and be punitive (punish people like a criminal court) in nature and not remedial (as it was intended to be)

 

 

 

 

The Canadian "Human Rights" Tribunal can:

  • Issue a Cease and Desist order: 

An order that is enforceable by the Federal Court of Canada The C&D order can be very broad and can literally silence the person it was issued against In my case, the CHRC refuses to identify what exactly they are complaining about – how could I follow a C&D order if issued? If disobeyed can face up to FIVE years in Prison (Federal court Rules – Rule 472) [John Ross Taylor spent one year in jail]

  • Can also assess fines and award “special compensation” to the complainant

     

Fines: Can award up to $10,000 in penalties [Sec 53(3)]

 

“Special Compensation”: Up to $20,000 to compensate "victim" [Sec 60(f)] 

 

Up to $20,000 for “willful or reckless discrimination” [Sec 60(g)]

 

All fines have outrageous interest rates applied if not paid immediately

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

In Defence of Freedom

Marc Lemire Vs. The Canadian "Human Rights" Enforcers

 

48 pages (color cover) - $10.00

 

 

 

Ordering information:

 

  • Via Credit Card:  Click on "Buy Now" icon above to order via PayPal

  • Via Mail: Send Cheque or Money Order to:

Marc Lemire

152 Carlton Street 

PO Box 92545 

Toronto, Ontario 

M5A 2K1 

Canada

  • Via CAFE: You can also order this booklet through the CAFE

Canadian Association for Free Expression 

P.O. Box 332, Station 'B' 

Etobicoke, Ontario 

M9W 5L3 

CANADA

  • Make a Donation:  Please assist in our battle for freedom of speech and make a donation

Canadian Association for Free Expression 

(Freedomsite Fund)

P.O. Box 332, Station 'B' 

Etobicoke, Ontario 

M9W 5L3 

CANADA

 

 

 

 

 

         

 

The Freedom-Site has been constantly online since 1996

Your Donations = Our Survival
152 Carlton Street,
PO Box 92545,
Toronto, Ontario,
M5A 2K1
Please send what you can to help keep our website operational

 

  Latest Updates

In Defence of Freedom

 

48 pages - $10

 

[more info...]

 

 


Books won't stay banned. They won't burn. Ideas won't go to jail. In the long run of history, the censor and the inquisitor have always lost. The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas.

 -- Alfred Whitney Griswold


Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself.

-- Potter Stewart