Well, the SCC has held that freedom of expression includes the freedom to hear others express themselves; freedom of expression takes place within a community. Still had some difficulty because none of the case law that was assigned directly dealt with that issue, especially when the other party is a non-resident. It's different then, for example, banning an article by Galloway.
Second question also confused me: it involved an affirmative action program that was disputed by . . . another minority group because the program discriminated against them. This would be easy to solve using section 15(2) R. v. Kapp, but the government, in my fake case, simply created the program out of political expediency. According to Kapp, the program's objective must be to ameliorate the needs of a disadvantaged group. The object was convenience . . . so I then looked at older case law and concluded the program was discriminatory but was, nevertheless, saved by section 1.
For non-Canadians--and Arvie--Canadian rights and freedoms are limited by section 1. They can also be limited by section 33.
