Share on Facebook
Share on X
Share by Email
Share on Google Classroom
Jim Keegstra was a secondary school teacher in rural Alberta. He was charged with a hate crime in 1984 after he taught antisemitic propaganda to his students. He was found guilty in 1985. But he launched repeated appeals. He argued that the Criminal Code violated his freedom of expression. The landmark case (R. v. Keegstra) set an important legal precedent. It tested the balance between the right to freedom of speech outlined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the law’s limits on hate speech laid out in the Criminal Code. The case came before the Supreme Court of Canada in 1990 and 1996. The Court ruled against Keegstra. It ruled that Canada’s hate laws imposed a “reasonable limit” on a person’s freedom of expression.
This article is a plain-language summary of the Keegstra Case. If you would like to read about this topic in more depth, please see our full-length entry: Keegstra Case.
Background
James “Jim” Keegstra was born in Vulcan, Alberta, in 1934. He worked as a farmhand and as a mechanic. He then went to university. He became a junior high and secondary school teacher in Eckville, a small town just west of Red Deer. He also served on town council. He was elected mayor in 1974.
In December 1981, multiple complaints from parents and a school board trustee were made regarding Keegstra’s classes. It was discovered that, for more than a decade, Keegstra had been teaching students that the Holocaust was a hoax. (The Holocaust was the murder of six million European Jews by Nazi Germany.) He had also referred to Jewish people using ugly, hateful language. He claimed that Jews were plotting to take over the world.
Keegstra was warned to stop teaching his racist, antisemitic views. But he refused. On 7 December 1982, Keegstra’s 14-year teaching career ended. He was fired and expelled from the Alberta Teachers Association.
First Trial
In January 1984, Keegstra was charged with the crime of promoting hatred against an identifiable group. This was covered by section 319 (2) of the Criminal Code. It stated, in part, “Everyone who… wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.”
Keegstra asked that the charge be dismissed. He argued that everything he told his students was protected by section 2 (b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 2 (b) is often referred to as the freedom of expression clause. It states, in part, “Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression.”
Keegstra’s 70-day trial ended on 20 July 1985. The jury rejected his argument and convicted him. He was fined $5,000. However, Keegstra appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal. It agreed with his Charter argument and struck down his conviction. The Crown then appealed this decision.
Appeals to the Supreme Court
In 1990, the Crown brought R. v. Keegstra to the Supreme Court of Canada. The case tested the extent to which someone could publicly express an opinion, even if that opinion promoted hatred of a group of people. Section 1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms tried to balance the rights of persons with the rights of groups within society. It states that freedoms are “subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law” that could be “justified in a free and democratic society.”
All seven justices ruled that the Criminal Code’s section on hate speech had indeed violated Keegstra’s freedom of expression. Four justices also stated that the law Keegstra had broken by expressing his anti-Semitic beliefs was a “reasonable limit” on a citizen’s freedom of expression. They argued that any speech that promoted hatred of a particular group might lead to harm or even violence. The Supreme Court asked the Alberta Court of Appeal to reconsider its opinion. In response, the Alberta court ordered a new trial.
Second Trial
Keegstra’s second trial ended on 10 July 1992. He was once again found guilty of a hate crime. He was ordered to pay a $3,000 fine. Keegstra refused to accept the verdict. He again appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal. He claimed that the judge had made legal mistakes in his responses to jury questions. The Alberta Court of Appeal agreed and overturned his conviction. The Crown then appealed that decision. The case once again went to the Supreme Court.
Return to Supreme Court
In March 1996, the Supreme Court heard from Keegstra’s lawyer. He argued that Keegstra’s Charter right to be presumed innocent was violated by section 319 of the Criminal Code. The justices decided they did not need to hear from the Crown. They ruled that this Charter violation was “reasonable” and that the Court’s earlier decision would stand. This meant that the Alberta court’s 1992 conviction would stand.
In October 1996, the Alberta court gave Keegstra a one-year suspended sentence. He also served 200 hours of community service and one year of probation.
Legacy
In 1983, Jim Keegstra ran for re-election as mayor of Eckville, but lost. He eventually moved to Red Deer. He died on 2 June 2014 at the age of 80.
The Keegstra case was the first successful conviction under the hate speech provisions of the Criminal Code. The case shows the delicate balance that exists with respect to a citizen’s ability to publicly express opinions and society’s ability to protect itself from hatred.
The Keegstra case also revealed an undercurrent of racism and hatred toward minority groups in Canada, as well as the limits of the law and the constitution in fighting it.
(See also Maclean’s Article: Keegstra’s Conviction Confirmed; Hate Propaganda; Human Rights.)
