Skip to main content

The first judicial order issued under Nova Scotia’s over-reaching Cyber-safety Act is reasonable and moderate. But the legislation goes too far, and its potential remains troubling.

Henrik Jonsson/iStockphoto

The first judicial order issued under Nova Scotia's over-reaching Cyber-safety Act is reasonable and moderate. But the legislation goes too far, and its potential remains troubling.

The new law was a response to the phenomenon of cyberbullying, in particular the death last year of a teenager, Rehtaeh Parsons, after photographs of an alleged sexual assault were posted on the Internet.

The first order under the law is meant to protect Chief Andrea Paul of the Pictou Landing First Nation, who had been subjected to a series of what Justice Heather Robertson of the province's Supreme Court called "almost crazy accusations," by Christopher George Prosper, a member of Ms. Paul's community. Mr. Prosper had moved to Ottawa, and did not appear in court, but the judge ordered him to remove the abusive messages and not to contact Chief Paul or her family.

Story continues below advertisement

But why is this law even necessary in a case such as this? Why not just seek a restraining order? Or launch a libel action?

The Cyber-safety Act defines cyberbullying so broadly that it covers a phone call that could be distressing to the recipient. A court can make an order – by phone, too – without any notice to the other party. An order can be made against a mere Internet address, rather than a named person. It can permanently expropriate any device "capable of connecting to" that address. In other words, the communications equipment of the unwitting parents of a teenager accused under the law could be seized and disposed of, for ever.

So far, Nova Scotia's CyberScan Unit appears to be sensibly resolving cyberbullying complaints. But, sooner or later, the Cyber-safety Act is going to be pushed to its limits – where it will run right smack into the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies