Freedom of Speech & Defamation

At the end of our previous article (April 02, 2016) we issued the following warning to our readers: “…do not defame the reputation of the person in a position of authority simply because he/she failed to meet certain expectations.” 

In order to understand and abstain from defaming the reputation of an individual or an identifiable group of individuals, we need to understand the legal concept known as “DEFAMATION”. It has two key components: 
A) Libel is a defamatory statement that is made in writing, print, electronic format, or any other method that produces a permanent record. 
B) Slander is a defamatory statement that is spoken or involves gestures, symbols, and signs that can harm a person’s reputation. 
Bloggers cannot engage in any form of responsible writing if they fail to understand their obligations under existing Canadian Defamation Laws.

Canadian Courts have often classified an article in print form as “libelous” or defamatory, if a judge discerned in the written text false statements, lies, or fabricated claims and the content of such a text inflicted a measurable damage on a person's reputation or financial resources.

To protect the sanctity of freedom of speech guaranteed by The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (a.k.a. The Charter) and entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, judges have pointed out in their verdicts that “Statements that are damaging and true are not defamation.”

For example, let us dissect a fictional situation. You are sitting in a coffee shop sipping your favorite latte and reading “The Toronto Sun” left behind by a patron. All of a sudden you see the familiar name of a neighbor who lives in your condo complex and happens to be a Board member. You want to cover all the details meticulously so you focus closely on the title “Drugs Seized At Pearson Two Arrested”. In the text you see the name, age, and profession of your neighbor who has convinced you years ago that he is a very successful real estate agent, but due to mysterious reasons he decided to sacrifice his reputation, and launch a new business venture in the field of coordinating the supply and demand of drugs in The City of Toronto. 

YES, you can go home and fire dozens of emails to your neighbors who should know what kind of a person is living in their midst, and you may want to promote his ouster from The Board of Directors of your condominium because of the nature of the crime allegedly committed, but chose your words wisely. What you read in the newspaper is nothing but an “allegation”. Nothing has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. You still have a moral and legal obligation to balance your freedom to voice a concern with adequate safeguards to prevent a permanent harm to the reputation of your neighbor who is also a Board member. 

NO, your neighbor does not have a reasonable chance of obtaining a favorable verdict in a lawsuit accusing you of libel. A judge will dismiss it from the early stages of the game for several reasons:
A) He destroyed his own reputation by engaging in a criminal activity-importing illegal chemicals/drugs.

B) In a December 2009 decision, The Supreme Court of Canada said that journalists/bloggers/twitters should be able to report statements and allegations if there’s a public interest in distributing the information to a wide audience, especially if the news was urgent, serious, and of public importance, and the journalists/bloggers used reliable sources, and tried to get and report the other side of the story.

However, bloggers beware of a danger that has spread its tentacles during the last decade and managed to silence a dozen of bloggers/Condominium Owners in The City of Toronto by relying heavily on SLAPP “Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation”. Slapp’s primary purpose is to suffocate any form of criticism centering on publicizing the shortcomings of a Condominium Board of Directors. Without any valid legal premise, The Board because it has access to huge financial resources, instructs a lawyer to launch a defamation lawsuit against a blogger, while being well aware that the chances of succeeding are extremely slim and sometimes non-existent. By peddling to the blogger a gloom and doom scenario of the heavy financial burden he has to shoulder in case he wants to challenge in a court of law the unreasonable allegations of The Board, and fearful of a guaranteed financial ruin, the blogger surrenders to The Board and shutts down his blogging site. So measure twice, cut once.

LEGAL NOTICE:

This article should not be relied upon or construed, implicitly or explicitly, as an individualized legal opinion/advice on the issue of defamation. Readers should seek the legal opinion of a lawyer who specializes in this specific domain. The article is strictly for educational purposes, with the key objective of emphasizing the cardinal role of maintaining a balanced approach when criticizing a Condominium Board or a Management Company that acts as the executive arm of The Board.

Admin “The 215 Forum” © April 06, 2016  

From Print To Electronic Format

Based on several factors and developments that have affected our building during the last few months, a decision was reached to stop the publication of the “The 215 Forum” © in the print form, and a switch was made to channel the views of unit owners who reside in building 215 in an electronic form.

Though it tries to articulate the grievances, opinions, suggestions of a group of owners who formed an alliance, this new blogging site remains widely open to any unit owner in building 215, and strongly encourages any resident of 215 including the 5 Board Directors (regardless of his/her membership in The Alliance) to voice from this electronic platform any concern they may have. Needless to say that the issue/s must represent a collective concern such as, but not limited to, safety, skyrocketing unsustainable monthly maintenance fees, bad or good services provided by the management team etc… 

What are the key principles/values that we advocate? As an alliance/movement we strongly believe that one of the cardinal mistakes an individual or a group of decision makers can make is to ignore or deny the fact that human beings are fallible. In other words we reject the claim that decisions made in a group setting are infallible. We reject also the principle that since its completion our building was ruled by successive Boards in a Top-Down form of governance, and it should remain so. We strongly believe that healthy, evidence-based criticism can introduce lots of positive changes, and pave the way for a higher standard of transparency and better management of the $2.000.000 million dollars currently targeted by The Board to cover the needs of the building during the fiscal year of 2015/2016. 

We advocate the principle that wisdom is recognizing that you don’t know everything, and ineluctably accept the possibility that your biases can force you to exclude more efficient options. We strongly support the argument that The Board instead of exclusively listening to the “Experts” of the “Condo Industry” should listen also to unit owners, because “Where no counsel is, the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety.” (Proverbs XI:14)

We encourage the active and direct involvement of unit owners in The Annual General Meetings (AGM), and after several years of intense effort to promote physical attendance, instead of using proxy forms, we still can’t understand how apathy can successfully prevent more than 50% of unit owners from showing a rudimentary interest in protecting the most valuable asset we have as property owners-our home.

This blog site will introduce regularly issues, concerns affecting the building. But we will focus also on articles (legal, condominium industry news…) published in the Canadian media about the experience of other Condo owners in the country at large, after all the more knowledge we have the better equipped we will be to protect our homes. One crucial fact, that every unit owner in the building should focus on while reading articles published in the Canadian media, is that the views expressed in the article represent the opinion of the author who wrote the article, and does not necessarily enjoy the support of the Owners Alliance.

In the near future, we will outline the basic rules all unit owners must follow while blogging on this site, because under currently existing laws and regulations, freedom of expression in a democracy does not mean you are free to make unfounded accusations, and remain beyond the reach of the law. YES, you are entitled to have an opinion about the performance of The Board or the management team, and NO democracy does not entitle you to hurl unfounded accusations, and unless you respect certain limitations imposed by the laws of the realm, you can face lots of legal troubles especially when your unfounded allegations damage the reputation of an identifiable party.

As a blogger adhere to the following strict rules:
Do not invent stories. Before reaching this blog site to express a grievance, contact in writing the management team, use a civilized language and make a sincere effort to reach a mutually acceptable resolution. Document properly the position of the person who addressed or refused to address your concern. Then, inform us about the difficulties that paved the way for your disappointment. Concentrate on events, ideas, and suggestions that failed to resolve your problem, but do not defame the reputation of the person in a position of authority simply because he/she failed to meet certain expectations.
More details will be published in the near future about the principles of exercising freedom of expression without damaging in the process the reputation of others.

Admin “The 215 Forum” © April 02, 2016