section 316(2)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section of the Criminal Code of Canada states that if defamatory content was published by order or authority of a government body, the accused must be discharged and considered not guilty.

SECTION WORDING

316(2) Where at any stage in proceedings referred to in subsection (1) the court, judge, justice or provincial court judge is satisfied that the matter alleged to be defamatory was contained in a paper published by order or under the authority of the Senate or House of Commons or the legislature of a province, he shall direct a verdict of not guilty to be entered and shall discharge the accused.

EXPLANATION

Section 316(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that protects the freedom of speech of elected officials in Canada. This section provides immunity from prosecution for any person who publishes defamatory statements or information in a paper that is published by or with the authorization of the Senate, House of Commons or the legislature of a province. In essence, this section of the Criminal Code recognizes the importance of public debate and free speech in the context of democratic institutions. It is important to note that elected officials in Canada have the right and responsibility to raise issues, express opinions, scrutinize government policies and programs, and engage in debates that may be critical of those who hold positions of authority. Without the ability to do so, elected officials could not carry out their democratic responsibilities and represent the interests of the public. This provision is significant because it ensures that individuals cannot be charged with defamation simply for articulating controversial ideas or sharing information that may be critical or embarrassing to government institutions. This ensures that our elected officials are able to fulfill their responsibilities without fear of legal consequences or censorship. Furthermore, because the courts are bound by this provision to dismiss any defamation charge related to publication authorized by a legislative body, it creates a strong deterrence effect against vexatious litigation intended to silence legitimate speech. In summary, section 316(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an essential element of the country's commitment to free speech and democracy, and serves to protect elected officials as they carry out their duties in the public interest.

COMMENTARY

Section 316(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that grants immunity to parliamentarians against defamation claims in relation to parliamentary proceedings. The section effectively means that if a matter is alleged to be defamatory and it was contained in a paper published under the authority of Parliament or a provincial legislature, the court must direct a verdict of not guilty and discharge the accused. The rationale behind this provision is that it serves to safeguard the freedom of expression and parliamentary privilege, which is a cornerstone of parliamentary democracy. Parliamentarians must be free to express their views in parliament without fear of reprisals, including defamation claims. This is because parliamentary proceedings, debates and discussions serve a crucial function in democratic governance. They facilitate the free exchange of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest, and ultimately contribute to better decision-making, policymaking and legislation. The provision also reflects the importance of accountability mechanisms in parliamentary democracy. Parliamentarians are accountable to the people who elected them, and this accountability is facilitated through parliamentary debates, discussions and proceedings. In order to promote this accountability, parliamentarians must be able to express their views and opinions freely, without fear of legal repercussion. However, it is important to note that the protection afforded to parliamentarians under Section 316(2) is not unlimited. The provision only applies to parliamentary proceedings, debates or discussions. Statements made outside of parliament, including statements made in the media or other public fora, are not subject to the immunity. Furthermore, the provision does not protect parliamentarians who deliberately and maliciously make defamatory statements. If a statement is made with malice or with the intention of harming another person's reputation, the parliamentarian can still be held liable for defamation. Overall, Section 316(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada strikes a balance between the protection of parliamentary privilege and the need for accountability and transparency in parliamentary democracy. It provides parliamentarians with the necessary freedom to express their views and opinions in a democratic forum, while also ensuring that they are held accountable for their actions. The provision serves as an important safeguard against censorship, and ultimately contributes to the maintenance of a healthy and robust democratic society.

STRATEGY

Section 316(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides immunity to individuals who publish defamatory material that was contained in a paper published by order or under the authority of a parliamentary body. This section is an important safeguard for freedom of expression, as it ensures that individuals are not prosecuted for publishing information that is relevant to public debate. However, like any legal provision, there are strategic considerations that should be taken into account when dealing with Section 316(2). One important strategic consideration is timing. If an individual is aware that they are going to be publishing potentially defamatory information, they should consider whether to wait until the information is published by a parliamentary body. This will provide them with the protection of Section 316(2) and may help to avoid costly legal proceedings. Another strategic consideration is the type of information being published. Section 316(2) only applies to information that is contained in a paper published by a parliamentary body. Therefore, if the information is not contained in such a paper, it will not be protected by this section. In such cases, other defences, such as truth or fair comment, may need to be relied upon. A further strategic consideration is the audience of the publication. Section 316(2) only applies to papers published by a parliamentary body. Therefore, if the publication is directed at a different audience, such as a trade publication or a newspaper, it will not be protected by this section. In such cases, other defences may need to be relied upon. When dealing with Section 316(2), there are several strategies that could be employed. One key strategy is to ensure that the information is published by a parliamentary body. This may involve working with parliamentarians or their staff to ensure that the information is included in a report or other parliamentary document. Alternatively, it may involve lobbying for the information to be included in a parliamentary document. Another strategy is to consider other defences that may be relied upon in the event that Section 316(2) does not apply. For example, if the information is not contained in a parliamentary paper, the defence of truth may be relied upon. Similarly, if the publication is directed at a different audience, the defence of fair comment may be relied upon. Overall, there are several strategic considerations that should be taken into account when dealing with Section 316(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada. By carefully considering the timing, type of information, and audience of the publication, and by employing appropriate strategies, individuals can help to ensure that they are protected by this important provision.