The Freedom to Offend? How the "Mohammad Cartoon Controversy" Has Influenced Public Debate on Canada's Hate Speech Regulation

Abstract

The Mohammad cartoon controversy began in Denmark in 2006 when a Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, published twelve cartoons, the majority of which depicted the Islamic Prophet Mohammad. Denmark had already been engaged with questions about Islam's compatibility with Danish culture, and the murder of Theo Van Gogh made international headlines in 2004. Writer Kare Bluitgen's failed attempt to find an illustrator for his children's book about Mohammad prompted public debate.1 This debate revolved around self-censorship, and the publication of twelve cartoons of Mohammad was the response of the editorial department of Jyllands-Posten. The initial reaction was local, limited to discussion and a few protests, the largest of which included 5,000 peaceful protesters.2 It wasn't until a delegation of Danish imams went on a tour of the Middle East with a dossier including the cartoons that it sparked many protests, some peaceful, some violent, and subsequently became a global story. An interesting element of the controversy is how it started as a consideration of reactions to the images of Mohammad, yet it spawned a variety of other controversies, such as the acceptability of republishing the images at the center of the main story to accurately address the major controversy. In Canada, controversy surrounding the republishing of the Mohammad cartoons led to a national discussion on the purpose, legitimacy, and usefulness of Section 13, the hate speech regulation, of Canada's Human Rights Act and its implementation by the Canadian Human Rights Commissions. This discussion subsequently resulted in the Parliament of Canada's vote to repeal the controversial hate speech law in June 2012.