|
|
The Ahenakew
affair: a bad law, an opportunity missed
By Marjaleena Repo
The David Ahenakew Affair, after five years in the courts, has sprung
back with full force after the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian
Nations (FSIN) voted to reinstate him as one its senators. The media
have reacted with vehement disapproval as have Jewish organizations.
The provincial and federal governments - the latter long overdue in its
own apology and restitution to Aboriginal people for a variety of
oppressive policies over the last century - are in high dudgeon,
threatening censure and sanctions against the FSIN. (Mr. Ahenakew, with
the storm gathering, declined the offer of reinstatement.)
Mr. Ahenakew’s brutish comments were made at an emergency meeting
December 12, ’02, in Saskatoon, organized to oppose yet another
detrimental policy imposed on First Nations people. He was angry and
agitated - reportedly to the point of being incoherent in his
speech - but his most offensive remarks came after the speech, in an
encounter with a reporter (described by the reporter as an interview
and by Ahenakew as an aggressive ambush). The reporter taped Ahenakew
blaming the Jews for creating World War II and calling them “a disease.”
Five days later Ahenakew, in a press conference, apologized
profusely for his offensive and hurtful language, stating that
his comments were made in anger and frustration over the plight of
native people in Canada, but that this did not excuse them. He
asked to reach out to the Jewish community.
This was the moment when history could have been made, by a new level
of communication and trust-building between Ahenakew, his own
constituency whom he had hurt and the Jewish community, victim of his
ignorant and deeply offensive comments. If Jewish organizations had
accepted the apology, one can imagine only positive outcomes: a deeper
understanding of how wrong his words were and what the actual
experience of German Jews was, from their relentless ostracism to the
“final solution” in concentration camps.
With David Ahenakew leading, prepared to be a changed man, his own
people, from young to old, could have entered a rich experience of
empathetic learning with many connections to their own suffering under
brutal colonial rule. A sign of forgiveness (and compassion) about one
man’s human failing would have brought Jews and Aboriginals together,
in the spirit of good will, resulting in deepening connections and new
friendships. Both peoples, Aboriginals and Jews, have a history of
resilience and survival, and when given a chance are capable of
transcending and recovering from the worst of circumstances, as well as
forgiving those who have hurt them and genuinely repent it.
This opportunity for transformation and restorative justice by building
on the strengths of the people involved was missed when the Jewish
leadership rejected, out of hand, Mr. Ahenakew’s apology. It wasn’t
good enough. They wanted “more,” opting to pursue the proverbial
pound of flesh. Canada’s highly problematic anti-hate law,
Section 319 of the Criminal Code, was invoked. Ahenakew was charged
with “inciting hatred, ” and cornered, forced to try to defend himself
against criminal charges. With apology and amends rejected, the
case proceeded to a conviction in 2005 - overturned on appeal June
2006 on the grounds that a crucial element, “willfulness,” was
missing as the remarks were made in confrontation with a reporter
rather than before an audience. Saskatchewan is retrying Ahenakew.
The 40-year old anti-hate law was flawed from the beginning, because it
pursues thought crimes: dissenting opinions, prejudices, stupidity and
ignorance among them. One of the first charged were young Canadian
nationalists in Toronto, demonstrating against a Shriners parade with a
“Yankee Go Home!” leaflet, supposedly hateful towards all Americans!
Age has not improved this unnecessary law. It now has its offspring in
Human Rights Commissions, where a couple of well-known journalists of
the right, Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn, have lately had to defend
themselves against charges of “encouraging hatred” in their writings.
But, significantly, in their case, they are being defended to the hilt
by editorials and columnists across the country, on the grounds of
freedom of expression, no matter how distasteful - and wrong - their
opinions are to people whose beliefs and ethnicity they offend.
The explanation might be that Levant and Steyn are attacking an
increasingly marginalized group of Canadians - Muslims and Arabs. David
Ahenakew, on the other hand, part of a powerless and long-suffering
group of original Canadians, having offended a powerful ethnic and
religious group, has no such support for his right to be ignorant and
wrong, and ends up sharing his guilt with all Aboriginals, to boot.
(Contrast this with MP Tom Lukiwski who, having grossly attacked
homosexuals, was upon his mea culpa instantaneously forgiven by the
Conservative government.)
Offensive ideas and concepts, of course, need to and will be
challenged, and expressing them will have consequences. But these
consequences ought to be social and political - allowing for apologies
and regrets - not criminal, with catastrophic consequences for
those caught by a law, which to quote Charles Dickens, “is a ass.”
(April 6, 08)
Marjaleena Repo is a freelance writer who lives in
Saskatoon. She can be reached at mrepo@sasktel.net
Referring YYC item: No visa for you!
yayacanada
|
|
