Go to the Globe and Mail homepage

Jump to main navigationJump to main content

AdChoices
Nova Scotia's Cyber-safety Act, passed in the wake of Rehtaeh Parsons's suicide, is being challenged as a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court. (Andrew Vaughan/THE CANADIAN PRESS)
Nova Scotia's Cyber-safety Act, passed in the wake of Rehtaeh Parsons's suicide, is being challenged as a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court. (Andrew Vaughan/THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Cyberbullying law inspired by Rehtaeh Parsons challenged as unconstitutional Add to ...

A judge has agreed to hear arguments on whether Nova Scotia’s groundbreaking anti-cyberbullying law violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms after upholding a protection order today in a case involving two businessman.

Halifax lawyer David Fraser asked the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia to hear the Charter challenge of the Cyber-safety Act, arguing the legislation is so vague and broad that cyberbullying could be considered anything online that hurts somebody’s feelings.

Robert Snell has been accused of cyberbullying Giles Crouch when the two former business partners got into a dispute.

Crouch has been granted a cyber safety protection order under the new law, which prevents Snell from communicating with him.

Fraser told the court the law is an unreasonable and unjustified infringement of freedom of expression rights under sections 2b and 7 of the Constitution.

He argued that the law can’t simply be left open to interpretation.

“To borrow a term that I’ve learned on social media the Cyber-safety Act is a dumpster fire that can only be extinguished by the Charter,” said Fraser. “What is at issue . . . is the incredibly broad manner in which the act defines cyberbullying.”

The provincial act defines cyberbullying as any electronic communication “that ought reasonably be expected to cause fear, intimidation, humiliation, distress or other damage or harm to another persons health, emotional well being, self-esteem or reputation.”

Fraser also argued that there is no rational connection between the law’s safety objectives and the means in the law to obtain those objectives.

“The act has to be carefully tailored to the objective (safety). But in this case its parameters are grossly broad.”

He said the law also doesn’t clearly spell out what is prohibited and simply gives the impression that “thou shalt not hurt anyone’s feelings online.”

The law was passed in May 2013 by the province’s former NDP government in response to public outrage around the case of Rehtaeh Parsons.

The teen’s family alleges Parsons was sexually assaulted in November 2011 and bullied for months when a digital photo of the assault was passed around her school.

She died after attempting suicide in April 2013.

Parsons’ death also acted as a catalyst for the federal government, which changed the Criminal Code to make it illegal to distribute intimate images without consent.

Outside court, Crouch spoke in support of the law.

“For the sake of all the victims and in the memory of Rehtaeh Parsons I do hope that the act is upheld in this case,” he said. “It’s very important that cyberbullying victims have the protection that they need so they can sleep safely at night as well as their families.”

Report Typo/Error

Next story

loading

Trending

loading

Most popular videos »

More from The Globe and Mail

Most popular