At the outset, I want to clarify that I am provictive and in favor of reports of sexual assault and sexual misconduct. Also, I don’t like to think that alleged attackers are using defamation lawsuits to silence victims, but there are limits! However, the manner in which the denunciations were made, these last days, and the lives, broken without the defendants being able to profit from the presumption of innocence revolts me.
Is it true or not? This is not the issue I want to address here, but the way it is done. When a person is subjected to assault or harassment which may be criminal, he must file a complaint as soon as possible with the police so that an investigation can be carried out and the Crown prosecutor will lay charges if the allegations are founded. This investigation is confidential to avoid making public trials before there are even formal charges. People have fought for a long time to avoid injustices which have destroyed lives and to set up a system which provides for fundamental rights, which is the presumption of innocence and the right to a full and complete defense.
Regarding inappropriate behaviors that are not criminal, which can be in the form of psychological harassment (including sexual harassment), and which we have often seen in the workplace, there is a way to do it. and a complaint must be made to those in authority for the allegations to be verified and sanctions to be imposed.
If we are in a bar and we have a private conversation with someone we find out of place or when the words of this person affect us, we can not only land on social media and report the words of this no one, knowing full well that these writings will destroy his life. At least we try to speak to him, ask him to apologize in private or by way of a confidential notice. When it is done the way Safia Nolin did it in the case of Maripier Morin, it could be, that, DEFAMATION.
Here is what it is, defamation, which constitutes a limit to the right to freedom of expression: “an attack, by verbal or written words, on the right to honor and to the reputation that any person has.”
And it manifests itself in three ways, established in the judgment of the Supreme Court Prud’homme c. Prud’homme:
“The first occurs when a person makes unpleasant remarks about a third party while knowing they are false. Such comments can only be made out of spite, with the intention of harming others. The second situation occurs when a person spreads unpleasant things about others when he should know they are wrong. […] Finally, the third case, often forgotten, is that of the slanderer who makes unfavorable, but truthful comments, without just cause, towards a third party. ”
By virtue of the excerpt above, note that even if the remarks could be true, if they are made by a “slanderous” person, which means “mean”, and without just reasons, that can constitute defamation. I think it’s terrible the way Safia Nolin acted knowing full well that her gesture would destroy the life of Maripier Morin, when there were many other ways to resolve the situation.
A few centuries ago, people were burned alive at the public pyre without trial. Now, we burn a person’s dignity at the stake of social media. The dignity of a person is fundamental in his life. We are not talking about gestures of physical violence against a person, but the gesture is all the more violent considering the consequences and the disproportionate damage that the targeted person will live.
In short, although I have often helped victims, in my career, and I am against any form of violence or harassment committed against a person, I consider that the way in which the denunciations were made, since the last days , is a total drift from our system.
Yes, I would be ready to take the case of Maripier Morin and take it to the Supreme Court, even if I do not endorse the way she would have acted that evening. There were other avenues to resolve the situation and the sentence imposed on Maripier Morin is disproportionate to the act she allegedly committed.
–
