Quebec Superior Court Acquits Author and Declares Part of Child Pornography Law Invalid 

Must Read

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus....

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”
Moshiuzzaman
Moshiuzzaman holds a 2:1 LL.B degree from BPP University (UK). He is currently pursuing the CFA chartership and working as an independent legal researcher at the American Society of International Law (ASIL)

Follow us

A Quebecer author and his publishers were charged with producing child pornography concerning fictional scenes in a horror novel. The Quebec Superior Court acquitted the author while declaring part of Canada’s Criminal Code. 

Background

In April 2019, the authorities charged Quebec author Yvan Godbout and his publisher Nycolas Doucetwith producing and distributing child pornography. The charges relate to a single paragraph in one of Godbout’s novels, a dark retelling of Hansel and Gretel, in which a father sexually assaults his daughter. The two were arrested in March 2019, after a reader who came upon the passage and called the authorities. The work was not marketed to children, it did not contain any explicit visual images, it also included a content warning printed on the back, and the scene was meant to be horrifying, not erotic. 

Challenges

Experts in the area have long flagged concerns about the expansive nature of Canada’s child pornography laws, which are broader than those laws such as the United States, and which have been used to prosecute artists like Eli Langer. But in case of Godbout, this is the first-time child pornography charges have been brought against a literary author for a work of prose. The fact that someone finds a passage offensive or immoral is not a sufficient ground to lay charges. To convict Godbout, the prosecution first had to show that the passage in question had conceivably incited a paedophile to commit a contact crime. Secondly, the prosecution had to show that Godbout’s book could not reasonably be viewed as a work of art. 

Quebec Superior Court decision

At trial, the Quebecer provincial prosecutor, by way of direct indictment argued that Yvan Godbout had produced child pornography between 1 November 2016 and 18 February 2019, which was contrary to section 163.1 (2) of the Canadian Criminal Code. Jean-Philippe Marcoux, Yvan Godbout’s lawyer, on the other hand, sought to obtain a declaration of the unconstitutionality of sections 163.1 (1)(c), (2), (3), (4), (4.1) and (6) of the Criminal Code as well as the section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) – which provides that all laws or state actions that interfere with life, liberty and security of the person must conform to the principles of fundamental justice; the basic principles that underlie notions of justice and fair process. Marcoux contended that these sections also violated the presumption of innocence principle provided under the Charter in section 11(d) while not being justified in a free and democratic society under section 1 of the Charter. 

Godbout argued that the author of horror and a fictional novel, who neither advocates nor advises on child pornography could not see his freedom of expression restricted through criminal charges which carry a social stigma since it would unjustifiably violate section 2(b) – freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, section 7 – the right to life, liberty and security of the person, and section 11(d) the presumption of innocence principle. 

The Court recognized the violation of section 2(b) but pleaded its justification because child pornography belongs to the category of expression whose protection is very relative given its deleterious effects on the most vulnerable groups in the society, in this case, children. The Court also denied the existence of a violation of section 7 or section 11(d). In the first case, Godbout does not demonstrate it – a violation of his right to life, liberty, and security. In the second case, because the burden of presentation is incumbent on an accused and therefore cannot constitute a reversal of the burden of proof. 

Based on the discussion above, on 24 September 2020, Justice Marc-Andre Blanchard ruled that section 163.1 (c) and section 163.1 (6) (b) cast too wide a net, that targets works of literature that do not endorse or promote paedophilia. While acknowledging that sexual material involving minors is harmful, Justice Blanchard stated that “the court believes [it] must distinguish between material that exposes a tangible reality, videos, or photos even drawings from literary fiction”. The Provincial Government of Quebec has 30 days to appeal the decision.  

Click here to see the full judgment.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that the petitioners were entitled to...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there is no requirement of passing...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -