A few months ago, CCLA appeared in a Supreme Court of Canada case to test the scope of the Criminal Code prohibition on counselling the commission of an offence. In this situation, the accused, a resident of Alberta, had posted material on the Internet describing how to break and enter, visa hack, and even to make bombs. CCLA Special Counsel Andrew Lokan argued that an overbroad interpretation of the offence could stifle legitimate free speech, such as Martin Luther King’s writings on civil disobedience.

In order to prevent this from happening, Lokan suggested that the offence be interpreted in light of the Charter to require an intention that the person counselled actually commit an offence and that there be a dimension of proximity between those who counsel and those who are counselled.

The Supreme Court reserved judgment in the case.