In the cases R v Zundel and R v Keegstra the court states that the relationship between form and content in relation to freedom of expression are guaranteed by the Charter. Freedom of expression guarantees one’s freedom to express their own opinion, and beliefs. In addition, section 2(b) of the Charter does not guarantee ones protection from some forms of communicating statements. In R v Keegstra, Mr. Keegstra decides to express his opinion on the holocaust with his class. Furthermore while Mr. Keegstra unknowingly promotes hatred against jews. In Mr. Zundel case he promotes hatred through the publication of the statements that he knew to be false and that were likely to cause injury or mischief to a public interest.
2a) R v Zundel and R …show more content…
If Mr. Zundel were to be charged with Section 319(2) like Mr. Keegstra, the decision by the Supreme Court of Canada would still be the same. Mr. Zundel book “Did Six Million Really Die” because it is irrelevant to the case because section 319(2) states that a member of society who willfully promotes hatred against an identifiable group. Mr Zundel knew that the statements in the book were false and willfully prompted hatred. In addition, everyone is entitles to their freedom of expression guarantees under section 2 of the Charter. Although the opinion may offend a group of people, the person is still entitled to their opinion. Furthermore the judges found that section 319(2) and section 2(b) is justified, only if the content promotes hatred against an identifiable group. In conclusion Zundel’s decision would be the same because, the book even though the statement are false doesn't promote hatred and its promotion is not use din a violent …show more content…
Oliver Wendell Holmes statement impacts both Keegstra’s and Zundel's case because both of their opinions promote hatred against identifiable groups. Keegstra teaches a history class in Alberta and taught his students that the jewish Holocaust never occurred, and they made up the whole thing to control world banking organizations. Furthermore Keegstra is a history teacher and is allowed to have a historical opinion, which proves through reason. In Zundel’s case he decided to publish a book that talked about the conspiracy of the Jewish Holocaust, and a big opinion in the book was that they made it up to get war reparations from Germany and the rest of the world. In addition, both Keegstra and Zundel’s opinions go against society values, it also limits the opinions. In addition, everyone including both Keegstra and Zundel are allowed to have their own opinion’s even though they may not go along with societies views. In conclusion Changes in beliefs and values have led us to change our viewpoints and teaches us to grow as a society. Which means that the statement by Mr. Holmes does apply both