So there's an T.O. East End Newspaper called Your Ward News. From what I gather its mostly a direct mail affair; the publisher, a guy named Leroy St. Germaine, has Canada Post deliver it to folks down in Ward 31 (The Beaches). It has apparently always been a bit flaky/racist, but the last couple of issues have seen a guy named James Sears gradually taking over, until recently he was appointed "Editor in Chief". And he has taken the publication "Full Nazi": articles promoting holocaust denial by old Heritage Front members; articles praising Adolf Hitler; articles promoting "white pride". The works.
Since then various people have taken various actions to make these guys stop publishing or get Canada Post to stop delivering them. For example, local businesses advertising in the paper were contacted and asked to pull their classifieds. This worked, more or less; Sold space within the publication has declined. But Your Ward has continued, and Canada Post has continued to distribute it.
Last week Canadian Civil Rights lawyer Richard Warman filed a human rights complaint against Canada Post, supported by numerous other luminaries. You can find the actual paperwork at WK's place through the last link. My favorite bit from it is:
Anyway, this may be an interesting lesson in how to file this kind of complaint after the repeal of Section 13 of the CHRA. Lets do a quick walk-through of the sections invoked.
5 It is a discriminatory practice in the provision of goods, services, facilities or accommodation customarily available to the general public
(a) to deny, or to deny access to, any such good, service, facility or accommodation to any individual, or
(b) to differentiate adversely in relation to any individual,
on a prohibited ground of discrimination.
This is invoked, as I understand it, to cover the discriminatory treatment of members of the public who are forced to receive the hate mail in question.
7 It is a discriminatory practice, directly or indirectly,
(a) to refuse to employ or continue to employ any individual, or
(b) in the course of employment, to differentiate adversely in relation to an employee,
on a prohibited ground of discrimination.
1976-77, c. 33, s. 7; 1980-81-82-83, c. 143, s. 3(F).
This suggests an infringement on the rights of the letter carriers forced to deliver the hate-mail. It's worth noting that CUPW supports Warman's complaint.
Sections 12 & 14:
12 It is a discriminatory practice to publish or display before the public or to cause to be published or displayed before the public any notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that
(a) expresses or implies discrimination or an intention to discriminate, or
(b) incites or is calculated to incite others to discriminate
if the discrimination expressed or implied, intended to be expressed or implied or incited or calculated to be incited would otherwise, if engaged in, be a discriminatory practice described in any of sections 5 to 11 or in section 14.
1976-77, c. 33, s. 12; 1980-81-82-83, c. 143, s. 6.
14 (1) It is a discriminatory practice,
(a) in the provision of goods, services, facilities or accommodation customarily available to the general public,
(b) in the provision of commercial premises or residential accommodation, or
(c) in matters related to employment,
to harass an individual on a prohibited ground of discrimination.
12 concerns discriminatory notices. If you are willing to publish/distribute this level of anti-semitic, anti-black, anti-whatever hate, its basically indicating to the people you deliver it to that you will likely discriminate and that they should too.
And, again, he various subsections of 14 cover discriminating against those members of the public who receive and must deliver this hate literature.
*So it will be interesting to see how this all plays out, in the absence of the now repealed Section 13 of the CHRA. Richard does not instigate frivolous complaints. As for Your Ward, finding the on-line version is easy enough if you want to take a look.
I imagine getting it delivered to your mailbox is like recieving uncovered, unsolicited pornography (indeed some of the images in the publication shade towards porn). Its basically a sick joke being played by a few white supremicists on the folks down in The Beaches. Hopefully this will put an end to it.