10.10.2009

the price of the olympics? free speech

I used to love the Olympics. Now I see the Games for the corrupt, nationalistic, sycophantic, hypocritical, corporate boondoggle that they have become. I love celebrating human achievement and athleticism, but this is not how to do it.

Note how in this story, those of us who value freedom of expression and the right to dissent are referred to as "civil libertarians".
A proposed B.C. law would allow municipal officials to enter homes to seize unauthorized and possibly anti-Olympic signs on short notice, civil libertarians say.

Violators could be fined up to $10,000 a day and jailed up to six months, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association said Friday.

The proposed law was introduced Thursday as a bill to amend the Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act.

The government said in a statement that the changes will "provide the municipalities of Vancouver, Richmond and Whistler with temporary enforcement powers to enable them to swiftly remove illegal signs and graffiti during the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games."

"The legislation does not change the existing scope of authority to regulate signs and graffiti. Rather, it provides, on a temporary basis, a faster way of removing signs and graffiti that violate municipal bylaws during the short period the Games are underway."

Bill Bennett, the minister of community and rural development, said that given the short duration of the Olympics, the cities of Richmond, Whistler, and Vancouver must be able to enforce their own bylaws quickly.

"That to me seems like a reasonable thing to do when you've got the Olympic games lasting 20-odd days," Bennett said.

"You've got the potential for some businesses to try and exploit the games logo without having paid for the rights to do that. I think its a reasonable thing for communities to want to remove those kinds of signs, and to remove them before then end of the Olympic Games."

Civil rights group concerned

But that explanation didn't sit well with civil liberties advocates, who said that if the law passes, municipalities would need to enact their own bylaws to take advantage of their new powers, and that the new powers go further than the government suggests, particularly in Vancouver.

The city passed the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games bylaw in June to restrict the distribution and exhibition of unapproved advertising material and signs in any Olympic area during the Games.

City officials have said the law is intended to clamp down on so-called ambush marketing, and it includes an exception for celebratory signs, which are defined as those that celebrate the 2010 Winter Games and create or add to the festive atmosphere.


. . .
Court challenge launched

Earlier this week, the association helped two anti-Olympics activists launch a legal challenge of Vancouver's 2010 Olympics bylaw in B.C. Supreme Court, claiming it was an unconstitutional restriction on free speech.

Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson says he's still studying the issue.

"Certainly, groups such as civil liberties have the right to challenge the laws, the bylaws that are made, so we'll respect that process and hopefully it makes those laws stronger and more reasonable," Robertson said.

The association is suspicious of the timing of the provincial bill's introduction so close to the Olympic games, which have been planned for years.

"We've seen them timing things so that they don't put in place laws that are special to the Olympics until the last minute," Holmes said. "And part of that leads to the suspicion that they've done it in a calculated and deliberate way, to remove the ability of the courts, and people who might want to take it to court, to have their rights protected."

Anti-Olympic activists involved in the legal challenge have also said they and their family and friends are being subject to unreasonable harassment and surveillance by the Olympic security unit.

11 comments:

redsock said...

A proposed B.C. law would allow municipal officials to enter homes to seize unauthorized and possibly anti-Olympic signs on short notice

Fuck the heck?

Breaking into a house to confiscate a sign in a window? Better hope the owner is not a gun nut.

sassy said...

I'd like to know what their definition of "anti-olympic".

L-girl said...

Good point. I'm sure the law is vague for a reason.

M@ said...

I believe their concern is advertising signs for non-olympic sponsors.

Because advertising is far more important than freedom of expression by the citizenry, don't you know.

Scott M. said...

Better hope the owner is not a gun nut.

Huh?

redsock said...

He may start a-shootin' at any intruder.

L-girl said...

Breaking into a house to confiscate a sign in a window? Better hope the owner is not a gun nut.

Breaking into house... owner has gun... intruder gets shot.

For that matter, person who lives in house creeping into house late at night... gets shot.

Gun nut.

sassy said...

L-girl,

Do you mean sort of like . . thought he heard intruder ?

L-girl said...

Do you mean sort of like . . thought he heard intruder ?

Exactly. I don't know if anyone keeps track of how many stories like this surface in the US each year, but it's a lot. Children, teens - concerned neighbours looking in on a sick friend - shot dead by someone who loved them.

Whenever I read or hear a woman saying she's going to get a gun for protection, I always think of this.

johngoldfine said...

Correct me I'm sure, but I always thought that under the guise of peace, order, good government, Canada was not really that interested in protecting free speech that overstepped the POGG grounds.

L-girl said...

You are right, but (a) it's highly questionable that a sign in a window is a threat to peace, order or good government. The Canadian courts do uphold free speech when it comes to things like this. And (b) I don't have to agree with any government. Just because it's Canadian doesn't mean I agree with it.