Protests in Canada celebrating terrorism and expressing anti-Israel sentiments have raised concerns since the October 7 attacks. Critics argue that the Liberal government's response, which includes proposed hate-speech legislation, may not effectively address the underlying issues. Justice Minister Sean Fraser announced plans for a bill that some believe will only reiterate existing laws rather than introduce meaningful change.

Fraser's proposal includes measures to criminalize actions that obstruct access to places of worship, schools, and community centers. However, these actions are already illegal under Canadian law. The Criminal Code prohibits interference with the lawful use of property, including religious sites. In 2017, the government specifically made it a crime to obstruct the use of religious property. Critics question whether adding more laws will have any real impact.

The proposed legislation also aims to make it illegal to intimidate or threaten individuals attending places of worship. Observers note that intimidation is already a criminal offense, raising concerns about the necessity of new laws. While regulating the use of public and private property is important, critics argue that targeting political speech, regardless of its nature, undermines the principles of a free society.

The debate extends to the implications of defining hate speech. Some fear that broad definitions could lead to the criminalization of those defending Israel or discussing the situation in Gaza. There are concerns that the government may adopt a definition of "anti-Palestinian racism" that could encompass legitimate expressions of support for Israel.

Fraser's bill also seeks to make it a crime to use terror symbols to promote hate. However, critics argue that Canada already has laws against recruiting for terrorist causes and counseling terrorist acts. They express concern that outlawing political symbols could infringe on free expression rights. Questions arise about how symbols, such as the Israeli flag, might be interpreted under this legislation.

Currently, Canadian law includes provisions against the willful promotion of hatred, but the threshold for arrest is high. Fraser's proposed changes would lower this threshold by removing the requirement for the attorney general's consent for charges and by providing a legislative definition of "hatred." Critics warn that these changes could have damaging effects on free speech.

As the government moves forward with its proposals, the balance between addressing hate speech and protecting free expression remains a contentious issue in Canada.