Facebook groups violate publication bans
TORONTO (CUP) -- The names of eight young offenders in three separate crimes across two provinces were published on the popular social networking site Facebook in the last week. Now legal experts are trying to figure out if Facebook or its users can be held liable for violating court-ordered publication bans.
News media are prevented from publishing the names or identifying characteristics of accused people under the age of 18 under Canada's Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA).
Social groups on Facebook, however, are often quickly formed in response to crimes and freely published the names of the accused and their victims.
According to Christian Girouard, a spokesperson for Canada's Department of Justice, this is contrary to the publication ban of the YCJA and those responsible could be charged.
“Facebook, in general, is considered a publication and that would clearly be covered by the legislations prescription not to publish young offenders' identity,” Girouard explained.
Stefanie Rengel, a 14-year-old girl in Toronto, was killed on New Years day and two youths were quickly taken into custody.
Shortly after the crime, Facebook groups popped up in her memory, naming both the victim and the two accused. Rengel's parents subsequently agreed to the public release of her name, which would otherwise have been protected.
Similarly, in Camrose, Alb., where four teens are accused of microwaving a cat to death, the teens could not be identified because of the YCJA. Facebook groups formed in opposition to their crime, however, clearly identified them.
One Facebook group was even shut down because it published the names of the youths along with threats against them.
But few teens are even vaguely aware of the YCJA, let alone how it might apply to their online activity.
“Until today I didn't even know what a publication ban was,” said a founder of a group in response to the cat killing.
Vincent Mosco, a Queen's University professor and Canada Research Chair in Communication and Society, said that recent debates about publication bans and Facebook are not surprising.
“I think it's most likely the case that people just don't understand that they are violating the law. They see Facebook as an anything-goes site, and simply put everything on it,” he said.
For Mosco, it comes down to education. But changing legislation governing the internet could be a complicated road, he said.
“I would absolutely agree that we need to look into forms of regulation and legislation, we also need to be aware that once we move down that road, we're inviting the recognition that there are closer ties between the ‘net, television and print media, and therefore the internet may need to be looked on as a means of communication that ought to be subject to more regulation and control,” he said.
Laura Westgate started a group in response to the cat killing in Alberta but said that her group existed to produce more discussion about animal cruelty laws and she will not tolerate naming the accused on her group.
“I would erase any posts disclosing the names on my Facebook group. However I work during the day and I can't watch the group every second. You can change the laws all you want, people are still going to talk,” she said.
The issue, however, is far from new.
“This has actually been a problem long before now, especially since blogging exploded,” explained Meaghan Daniel, a law student at the University of Manitoba.
“But no blog was as popular as Facebook is now. There is also another interesting issue in this area of the law, because the U.S. does not have similar laws on publication bans, so they can often report things about Canadian cases that the Canadian media cannot report.”
No charges have been laid for violating these publication bans. According to Girouard, though, it is up to each individual police jurisdiction to enforce the law and lay charges.
Mosco does not believe laying charges is the way to combat this from occurring again, though.
“I would like to see more education and consideration of legislation before we get more charges,” he said.
“We need a debate now about the limits of communicating over new media and how those square with our tradition of protection in dissemination in other media. We are like to see though, that there will be more cases of this sort before there is a full recognition.”
But violating a publication ban could subvert justice in still other ways.
Some fear that publishing the names of various accused on Facebook may lead to a mistrial if the defence were to argue they were not given a fair trial.
“Well I hope it doesn't take a mistrial, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. And not just one mistrial, but several — a consistent pattern of problems over airing material on the ‘net —— for this to become an issue. Unfortunately, it often takes several cases of breaking the law to lead to some reflection on changing it.”
Others have attempted to shift the discussion to publication bans in general and whether they still have a place in the Canadian justice system.
News media are prevented from publishing the names or identifying characteristics of accused people under the age of 18 under Canada's Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA).
Social groups on Facebook, however, are often quickly formed in response to crimes and freely published the names of the accused and their victims.
According to Christian Girouard, a spokesperson for Canada's Department of Justice, this is contrary to the publication ban of the YCJA and those responsible could be charged.
“Facebook, in general, is considered a publication and that would clearly be covered by the legislations prescription not to publish young offenders' identity,” Girouard explained.
Stefanie Rengel, a 14-year-old girl in Toronto, was killed on New Years day and two youths were quickly taken into custody.
Shortly after the crime, Facebook groups popped up in her memory, naming both the victim and the two accused. Rengel's parents subsequently agreed to the public release of her name, which would otherwise have been protected.
Similarly, in Camrose, Alb., where four teens are accused of microwaving a cat to death, the teens could not be identified because of the YCJA. Facebook groups formed in opposition to their crime, however, clearly identified them.
One Facebook group was even shut down because it published the names of the youths along with threats against them.
But few teens are even vaguely aware of the YCJA, let alone how it might apply to their online activity.
“Until today I didn't even know what a publication ban was,” said a founder of a group in response to the cat killing.
Vincent Mosco, a Queen's University professor and Canada Research Chair in Communication and Society, said that recent debates about publication bans and Facebook are not surprising.
“I think it's most likely the case that people just don't understand that they are violating the law. They see Facebook as an anything-goes site, and simply put everything on it,” he said.
For Mosco, it comes down to education. But changing legislation governing the internet could be a complicated road, he said.
“I would absolutely agree that we need to look into forms of regulation and legislation, we also need to be aware that once we move down that road, we're inviting the recognition that there are closer ties between the ‘net, television and print media, and therefore the internet may need to be looked on as a means of communication that ought to be subject to more regulation and control,” he said.
Laura Westgate started a group in response to the cat killing in Alberta but said that her group existed to produce more discussion about animal cruelty laws and she will not tolerate naming the accused on her group.
“I would erase any posts disclosing the names on my Facebook group. However I work during the day and I can't watch the group every second. You can change the laws all you want, people are still going to talk,” she said.
The issue, however, is far from new.
“This has actually been a problem long before now, especially since blogging exploded,” explained Meaghan Daniel, a law student at the University of Manitoba.
“But no blog was as popular as Facebook is now. There is also another interesting issue in this area of the law, because the U.S. does not have similar laws on publication bans, so they can often report things about Canadian cases that the Canadian media cannot report.”
No charges have been laid for violating these publication bans. According to Girouard, though, it is up to each individual police jurisdiction to enforce the law and lay charges.
Mosco does not believe laying charges is the way to combat this from occurring again, though.
“I would like to see more education and consideration of legislation before we get more charges,” he said.
“We need a debate now about the limits of communicating over new media and how those square with our tradition of protection in dissemination in other media. We are like to see though, that there will be more cases of this sort before there is a full recognition.”
But violating a publication ban could subvert justice in still other ways.
Some fear that publishing the names of various accused on Facebook may lead to a mistrial if the defence were to argue they were not given a fair trial.
“Well I hope it doesn't take a mistrial, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. And not just one mistrial, but several — a consistent pattern of problems over airing material on the ‘net —— for this to become an issue. Unfortunately, it often takes several cases of breaking the law to lead to some reflection on changing it.”
Others have attempted to shift the discussion to publication bans in general and whether they still have a place in the Canadian justice system.
