Jump to content

R v Boucher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Logjam2650 (talk | contribs) at 19:30, 21 January 2019 (Opinion of the Court). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

R v Boucher
Supreme Court of Canada
Hearing:
Judgment: December 18, 1950
Full case nameAime Boucher v. His Majesty the King
Citations[1951] S.C.R. 265
Prior historyJudgment for the Crown in the Quebec Court of King's Bench, Appeal Side.
RulingAppeal allowed.
Holding
The criminal offence of seditious libel requires language that is calculated to promote public disorder or physical force or violence.
Court membership
Chief Justice: Thibaudeau Rinfret
Puisne Justices: Patrick Kerwin, Robert Taschereau, Ivan Rand, Roy Kellock, James Wilfred Estey, Charles Holland Locke, John Robert Cartwright, Gerald Fauteux
Reasons given
MajorityKerwin J.
ConcurrenceRand J.
ConcurrenceKellock J.
ConcurrenceEstey J.
ConcurrenceLocke J.
DissentRinfret C.J.
DissentTaschereau J.
DissentCartwright J., joined by Fauteux J.

R v Boucher[1] is a famous Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court overturned a conviction for seditious libel on the grounds that criticizing the government was a valid form of protest.

Background

Aimé Boucher was a farmer in Beauce, Québec, and a practicing Jehovah's Witness. In 1946,[2] he was arrested while distributing pamphlets entitled "Québec's Burning Hate for God and Christ and Freedom Is the Shame of all Canada." The pamphlets criticized the Québec government suppression of the Witnesses and the courts for doing nothing to prevent it. Boucher was charged for seditious libel - for endeavouring to promote public disorder - under section 133(2) of the Criminal Code. At trial, the jury found Boucher guilty, which was upheld on appeal.

Opinion of the Court

In a 5 to 4 decision, Canada's Supreme Court held that the mere publishing of critical statements, without any intention to incite violence against the government, could not be seditious libel.

Footnotes

  1. ^ R v Boucher, [1951 Archived 2011-07-20 at the Wayback Machine SCR 265.
  2. ^ R v Boucher, p 305]