FREEDOM TO SPEAK / Part 368 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Freedom of expression is a foundation of a functioning democracy. Section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that "Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: ... freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication." Freedom of speech is a Canadian constitutional commitment that is predicated upon the belief that a free society is unable to function when there is coercive legal censorship motivated by those with power and an ideology that will not permit opposing viewpoints. Freedom of speech is maintained in Canada so that truth may be attained, people may be assured of self-fulfillment, people may participate as members of the society and as a means whereby both stability and change may be addressed.

Photo: (Soe Zeya Tun/Reuters)

The country of Myanmar is a member of the United Nations and is ruled by a military junta which has stifled free speech. Recently the international press has made much of the release on Saturday of 1991 Nobel Peace prize recipient pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. She is now 65 years of age. She has spent 15 of the past 21 years in detention without trial. Her latest period of house arrest spanned 7½ years. Such oppression by the military regime explains why governments of Australia, Canada, France, the United Kingdom and the United States still refer to the country as "Burma", refusing to recognize the validity of the name change imposed by the Junta.

Photograph: Sipa Press/Rex Features

Canada granted Aung San Suu Kyi honourary Canadian citizenship in 2007 and Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Saturday called her a Champion of Peace. That speaks to the peaceful means by which she has always advocated her push for democratic rule in Burma, much in the character of Martin Luther King Jr., and Mahatma Gandhi. (Photo right: Aung San Suu Kyi's husband, the late Michael Aris and sons Alexander and Kim receiving Nobel Peace Prize on her behalf in 1991.) 

In Canada, there are limits to free speech and free press guarantees, as the Canadian Supreme Court is quite ready to point out. Yet those limits most certainly do not apply to speaking out about what is perceived to be injustice caused by a government agency and its employees. In British Columbia, numerous personal and media websites and blog sites have been chronicling stories about the way child welfare is conducted, particularly the administration of child protection. Some of those sites, like this one, are designed not merely to tell a story but to advocate for substantial and constructive changes in policy and practice that will ultimately result in benefits for Ministry of Children administrators and social workers as well as for children, parents and families. It is my position that the action steps for Ministry transformation in B.C. have not yet come close to the local administration of service delivery where all of the heart-breaking issues occur. Until Victoria begins to listen to the grassroots, to social workers and to parents, MCFD will fail to understand what must change.

A Basis for Discussion, Part 323, Sept 29 from this GPS site
CBC Story: Aung San Suu Kyi released
Video of Her Release: 
A Wonderful Collection of Personal Photos of her life with her late husband, British Academic Michael Aris 
Gallery of Her Life

Obama and Nobel

Obama and Nobel

Almost no one outside the Committee itself was linking the two names before Friday morning.

Universal surprise best expresses the world’s reaction to the news that the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to President Barak Obama, eight months into his first term as president of the United States of America.

I am weary already of mean spirited people poking at Barak Obama, but…. As much as I applaud the good intentions and some values of this president, I too believe that the prize was not deserved, just yet. The truth is the award this time appears to have been bestowed as an encouragement for intentions rather than as a reward for achievement. This distinction according to Alfred Nobel himself should be conferred on "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." And get this. The deadline for nominations for the prize was February 1st 2009 and Obama had just been inaugurated two weeks earlier. What presumptive group of strategists thought this nomination would be more than a joke when it nominated him so long ago. Obama was compelled to produce something resembling an international peace initiative. So he has reached out to adversaries, particularly Iran and with mixed results. He also delivered a commendable speech in Cairo in which he called for "a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world." Further, he has called for a world without nuclear weapons. But all this is mere ambition and hope and aspiration yet the Nobel awards Committee maintains that Obama’s contribution this year is more worthy of its honour than 204 other nominations for this year's peace prize. Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and Chinese dissident Hu Jia were among the favourites. In fact the Nobel Committee’s choice of Obama was for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples." It also stated, "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future." Further, "His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population." Nobel Committee head Thorbjoern Jagland said: "It was because we would like to support what he is trying to achieve."

Obama in his statement sees the prize to him for what it is by saying the he would accept the prize as a "call to action".