[Section 15] Liberals want a jury to hear Harper's libel chill case

The CBC reports that the Liberals have filed their statement of defense in response to Harper's ill-advised libel suit against the LPC. The LPC wants a trial by jury, and is calling this vexatious suit a "fundamental attack on the freedom of political expression."

More from the CBC:

"The reports were published in good faith and in accordance with the Defendants' legal, moral, social and profession duties to engage legitimate public debate," the statement of claim says.

According to the statement of claim, the Liberals "expressly" deny that the words are defamatory of Harper, but if they are, then they are "true or substantially true."

As well, the Liberals deny Harper has suffered damage to his reputation and reject the damages he's seeking as "excessive, exaggerated, remote."

But they add that if Harper's reputation was damaged, then he brought it upon himself for refusing to answer questions about the controversy.

Don't be thrown by the multi-level arguments. This is normal in both statements of defense and claim.
I predict that a jury will not only acquit the LPC, they will debate how much spit to pour in Harper's eye.

If you actually read what the LPC site published, you'll find commentary and Hansard content which had already been broadcast all over Canada by CPAC and the major networks, television stations and newspapers. There was considerable re-publishing of the content on blogs as well. Commentary in newspapers and on television was not favourable towards Harper, who, to this day, has deliberately failed to be held accountable in the Cadman affair by refusing to answer key questions.

To sue the Liberals over content already more thoroughly broadcast all over Canada by the media is not only ridiculous, but is transparently a strategic attempt by Harper to silence his critics. This is libel chill at its lowest temperature, designed to freeze public discussion of a ruling Party scandal, which, if the allegations are true, could wound the Conservative as deeply as Adscam wounded the Liberals.

We do know that Harper was told by Donna Cadman herself some two years ago about the bribe allegation, and that Harper did nothing about it. Our PM has known for all that time about a likely attempt by his Party to bribe a sitting MP and did nothing. We also have a recording where Harper demonstrates some level of personal knowledge about offers made to Cadman.

Given Harper's refusal to answer questions, and the fact that he clearly had personal knowledge of offers being made and that a bribe allegation existed, he simply can't have any basis for crying foul when the opposition tries to shine some light in our interest. The Opposition is here to serve us in part by exposing, or trying to expose, flaws in government. That check against the abuses of government needs privilege to act – privilege which Harper is trying to intimidate into disuse with this vexatious lawsuit.

Canada's libel laws are quite backwards. Other English-speaking countries have long since amended their libel laws to prevent abuses just like this one, and, indeed, this case may be the very one which will lead to common-law changes to allow for scrutiny of public figures without the implied threat of a tort.
We can only hope Harper fails. Otherwise freedom of expression in this country will be eroded to the detriment of us all.

Except those in power with something to hide.

--
Posted By Mark Francis to Section 15 at 5/14/2008 03:50:00 PM