Legal Challenge
Legal challenge of Section 13 (Marc Lemire constitutional challenge)
   >> more info

Political Challenge
The political challenge to Section 13 and media articles
   >> more info

What is Section 13?
History and operation of Section 13, and CHRC totalitarianism.
   >> more info

Victims of Section 13
Writers, webmasters, magazines, Christians, the entire list of victims
   >> more info

Books and Videos
Get one of these informative booklets and videos on Section 13 
   >> more info

Support The Challenge
Support the legal team challenging Section 13 
   >> more info

Constitutional Challenge of Section 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act

.Section 13 of the CHRA is the single largest threat to Freedom of Speech in Canada!

On November 25, 2005, Marc Lemire and his legal team, heading up by courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka, filed before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal a constitutional challenge of Section 13 (internet censorship) and Section 54 (impose hefty fines) of the Canadian Human Rights Act

On Sept 2, 2009, the Tribunal found Section 13 to be unconstitutional and an affront to freedom of speech. The fanatical CHRC appealed the ruling. On December 13, 2011, the Federal Court of Canada heard the appeal.  In October 2012, The Federal Court upheld Section 13 and struck down the penalty provisions.

Legal Documents Submitted to Federal Court of Appeal

 Lemire Notice of Appeal

Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Appellant Marc Lemire


-- Main Documents & Latest Updates --


July 29, 2014: The Obituary of CHRC Censorship [Part 3] Section 13 Goes Mainstream: The Mark Steyn / Macleans Case

June 29, 2014: The Obituary of CHRC Censorship [Part 2]: Modus Operandi of the CHRC: "simple forced deletion of the message"

June 26, 2014: Section 13 is Officially Repealed: The Obituary of CHRC Censorship [Part 1]

Feb 5, 2014: Defamation Laws in Canada are Nuts w/ Connie Fournier and Free speech double standards by Brian Lilley

Feb 4, 2014: Blogosphere Comments on the Court of Appeals disgraceful decision on Section 13 - Internet Censorship

Feb 4, 2014: Court of Appeals rules that Internet Censorship via Section 13 is great! Court of Appeals rules that Internet Censorship via Section 13 is great!

Feb 3, 2014: NATIONAL POST: Court finds Internet hate speech law Section 13 to be constitutionally valid, doesn't violate freedom of expression

Nov 10, 2013: Federal Court Appeal Docs: A devastating critique of Canada's Internet censorship laws (Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Appellant Marc Lemire)

Nov 8, 2013: Lemire Appeal against Internet Censorship set to be heard on November 14, 2013

July 3, 2013: Section 13 Repeal - What does it mean for Victims of Section 13? NO new Section 13 cases, but for those currently caught by Section 13. It’s all out WAR!

June 9, 2013: Support Marc Lemire's Freedom of Speech Legal Defense Fund to Strike Down Section 13: "Why Marc Lemire Must Challenge Constitutionality of A Law That May Be Repealed"

June 4, 2013: Why Marc Lemire Must Challenge Constitutionality of A Law That May Be Repealed [PLEASE SUPPORT FREEDOM]

May 24, 2013: Fight Internet Censorship -- Support Marc Lemire's Freedom of Speech Legal Defense Fund to Strike Down Section 13

May 21, 2013: Why is it okay for the Government to Discriminate, but not Ordinary Canadians? The Marc Lemire Case

April 30, 2013: CCLA & CAFE Granted Intervener Status for Federal Court of Appeals review of Internet Censorship Law [Section 13]

April 13, 2013: CHRC 2012 Annual Report shows Section 13 is literally dead. (Complaints - Received and Accepted by CHRC a total of **2** in 3+ years)

April 9, 2013: Canadian Civil Liberties Association Applies for Intervener Status in the Lemire Constitutional Challenge of Sec. 13 Internet Censorship

March 6, 2013: Canada = Absurdistan: Whatcott is guilty of "Hate Speech" for criticism of "sodomites", YET Government Agencies REFUSE to even allow Homosexuals to Donate Blood or Organs

March 5, 2013: Supreme Court Fossils rule that "Truth is no Defence!" ... Even tho not a single Government Expert Witness Agreed!

March 2, 2013: CHRT 'Judge' Who slammed Richard Warman - Assigned to Marc Lemire case

February 13, 2013: Lemire Files Devastating Legal Brief on Section 13 and the Corruption of the CHRC to the Court of Appeals

February 12, 2013: [VIDEO] Ezra Levant: Ethical 'Jihad' against Section 13 - Canada's Internet Censorship Legislation & [VIDEO] Brian Lilley: Restoring Freedom [Repeal Section 13 Now!]

Jan 29, 2012: Federal Court Rules: CHRC will get their fiendish wish; Lemire has to fight on two fronts in two courts. Marc Lemire now has to fight against Section 13 at the Court of Appeals and against a lifetime gag order at the “Human Rights” Tribunal

Dec 30, 2012: Richard Warman's 'Maximum Disruption' Approach: Defamation Suits, Criminal Complaints, Section 13 cases and even Copyright Act lawsuits

Dec 18, 2012: CHRC: Gag Lemire Now - Who cares whether or not Section 13 is constitutional?

Nov 22, 2012: The Marc Lemire Internet Free Speech Case: A Bitter Grudging Partial Victory in Lemire Case

Nov 4, 2012: Marc Lemire Appeals outrageous ruling by the Federal Court on Section 13 censorship.  Judge makes multiple errors and fails to mention he was a key player at DoJ who passed legislation which applied Section 13 to the internet!

Oct 16, 2012: Mediation in the Lemire Case: The Federal Court gets it all wrong

Oct 5, 2012: Lucy 'Looses': Penalty Provisions Struck Down in 'Human Rights' Censorship Law -- Richard Warman asked for a penalty against Lemire at the Tribunal - And the Federal Court stuck down the entire penalty provision! Warman 0 - Lemire 1.

Oct 4, 2012:  DECISION The Federal Court of Canada's decision in the Marc Lemire case.  Strikes down penalty provision, but upholds Section 13

Oct 4, 2012: [VIDEO] Ezra Levant and Chris Schafer discuss the Federal Court Ruling in Lemire case

Oct 3, 2012: BREAKING: Federal Court Rules in Lemire case. Some good news and some bad news: Wacky ruling by Federal Court sends the Marc Lemire case back to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for a declaration on Section 13 but invalidates the Penalty Provisions

July 10, 2012: [RoadKill Radio News] Interview with Marc Lemire: Canada Attacks Free Speech with Entrapment and Intimidation and the fall of Section 13

Dec 20/11: Canadian Human Rights Commission ARE LIKE THE NAZIS! Kulaszka was right to make the comparison

Dec 15/11: [VIDEO] Marc Lemire on Ezra Levant's The Source on Section 13 censorship. Plus Chris Schafer of the Canadian Constitution Foundation

Dec 15/11: Human Rights Commission's Attempt to Save Internet Censorship Law Is "Like Putting Lipstick on a Pig" -- Kulazska Says

Dec 12/11: The Fall of Section 13 Censorship: Information on the Upcoming Lemire case (Address of hearing, live blogging, parties, judge, etc)

Dec 8/11: The FATE of Section 13 to be decided in Federal Court - December 13-14, 2011

Nov 30/11: DISMANTLING TYRANNY: The Marc Lemire Case 80 pages - $15 [more info...]

June 4/11: Documents referred to by Marc Lemire during the Ezra Levant’s ‘The Source’ Interview

June 3/11: Marc Lemire on Ezra Levant's 'The Source' Discussing Censorship & Section 13

May 26, 2011: One Year without Section 13 … and the sky has not fallen!   The “perfect storm” is here to rid Canada of censorship legislation

June 20, 2010: CHRC Spent Close to $85,000 to Uphold Internet Censorship Legislation

May 28, 2010: BREAKING!!! Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Refuses to Enforce Section 13. All S.13 cases halted

Feb 15, 2010:  Marc Lemire files at the Federal Court to oppose Internet censorship from the misnamed Canadian "Human Rights" Commission [PDF: Lemire Memorandum of Fact and Law]

Sept 2, 2009: Canadian Human Rights Tribunal finds Section 13 and 54 to be unconstitutional, and refuses to apply the section against Marc Lemire

Aug 25/08:  Final Submissions on the Constitutionality of Section 13  (part 1)

Aug 25/08:  Final Submissions on the Constitutionality of Section 13  (part 2)

Nov 25, 2005: Notice of Constitutional Question sent to all Attorneys' General

Dec 6, 2005: FACTUM - Written Submissions on Constitutional Challenge of Section 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act  (This is a MUST read)

Spreadsheet of all victims of the Canadian Human Rights Commission

Expert Reports on Section 13

  • Dr. Donald A. Downs:  Expert on Freedom of Speech, Speech codes and effects of speech
  • Dr. Michael Persinger:  World famous neuro-scientist. Report on social - psychological effects of speech and the negative cultural impact of legal punishment
  • Bernard Klatt:  Internet and computer expert from British Columbia. 





In September 2009, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled that:


[290] Thus, following the reasoning of Justice Dickson, at 933,one can no longer say that the absence of intent in s. 13(1) “raises no problem of minimal impairment” and “does not impinge so deleteriously upon the s. 2(b) freedom of expression so as to make intolerable” the provision’s existence in a free and democratic society. On this basis, I find that the Oakes minimum impairment test has not been satisfied, and that s. 13(1) goes beyond what can be defended as a reasonable limit on free expression under s. 1 of the Charter.


c) Conclusions with respect to the claim of infringement on the freedom of expression

 [295] For all the above reasons, I find that s. 13(1) infringes on Mr. Lemire’s freedom of expression guaranteed under s. 2(b) of the Charter, and that this infringement is not demonstrably justified under s. 1 of the Charter.

[279] This question, however, is not what is relevant to the present discussion. The point is that, when assessed against the characteristics of the penalty provisions enumerated in these decisions, it is evident that s. 13(1) has become more penal in nature (irrespective of whether s. 11 Charter rights are necessarily triggered). The provision can no longer be considered exclusively remedial, preventative and conciliatory in nature, which was at the core of the Court’s finding in Taylor that s. 13(1)’s limitation of freedom of expression is demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society, and thereby “saved” under s. 1 of the Charter.

I have determined that Mr. Lemire contravened s. 13 of the Act in only one of the instances alleged by Mr. Warman, namely the AIDS Secrets article. However, I have also concluded that s. 13(1) in conjunction with ss. 54(1) and (1.1) are inconsistent with s. 2(b) of the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. The restriction imposed by these provisions is not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter. Since a formal declaration of invalidity is not a remedy available to the Tribunal (see Cuddy Chicks Ltd. V. Ontario (Labour Relations Board), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 5), I will simply refuse to apply these provisions for the purposes of the complaint against Mr. Lemire and I will not issue any remedial order against him (see Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Martin, 2003 SCC 54 at paras. 26-7).

See full decision [here]


This is the first time the new revised Section 13 and 54 of the CHRA has been constitutionally challenged. This is the major battle to rid Canada of this totalitarian law. Another constitutional challenge before the Federal Court of Canada has been stayed pending the outcome of this challenge. [Kulbashian v CHRC/AG - 2007 FC 354]


Constitutional Challenge of Section 13

Opposed to Section 13/54  In favour of Section 13
  • BC Civil Liberties Association
  • Canadian Civil Liberties Association
  • Canadian Association for Free Expression
  • Canadian Free Speech League
  • Canadian Human Rights Commission
  • Canadian Jewish Congress
  • Simon Wiesenthal Centre
  • B'nai Brith Canada
  • African Canadian Legal Clinic
Expert Witnesses:

Fact Witnesses:

Witnesses via Subpoena: (CHRC employees, subpoenaed by Lemire):

Federal Court of Canada Appeals:

Expert Witnesses:
  • Karen Mock (CHRC)
  • Alexander Tsesis (AG)

Fact Witnesses:

  • Richard Warman


Lawyer for the CHRC

Outworking the Censors


25 Tribunal Hearing days across
Four cities (Toronto, Mississauga, Ottawa, Oakville)


CHRC called 2 witnesses

Attorney General of Canada called 1 witness

Marc Lemire responded with 8 witnesses

Over 4,000 pages submitted by Lemire
Over 450 letters of correspondence
Motions filed by Marc Lemire: 15
Motions filed by CHRC: 3
Motions won by Marc Lemire: 9
Pages of transcript so far: 5,638
Binders of evidence by Marc Lemire: 8
Binders of evidence by CHRC: 4


(As of December 2007)

















  "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act" - George Orwell 

[Support the Constitutional Challenge]