A fan, Robert Russell, emailed me a few days ago about the following, so I asked him to write a guest entry about it. Here it is.
The 2010 Olympic Games are almost here. However, with just a few months to go we should be cognizant of a few things. We’ve all read about special ops training in downtown Vancouver and the ridiculous amount of money spent on “security” for the games. Maybe what we don’t realize is that above the normal “national security” issues, there is an underlying denial of free speech.
One can understand that defacing the Olympic clock is a crime, as that is defacing public property. However, there is no crime against voicing your opinion as long as you are not intruding on the rights of others.
That is until now. According to the CBC [1] if you have unauthorized or anti-Olympic signs on your premises, you could face a hefty fine and even jail time.
The law is actually a proposed amendment to an existing municipal law, the Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act which is typically reserved for graffiti and sign regulation [2]
While the example provided by Bill Bennett in the interview with CBC related to exploitation of the Olympic Games logo (such as unauthorized shirts or signs or backpacks, etc…) the reality is that the law also applies to graffiti.
What defines graffiti? Graffiti is defined as “any type of public markings that may appear in the forms of simple written words to elaborate wall paintings.” [3] The bylaw does not make any distinction as to good or bad graffiti, so this very broad definition holds true in the law.
Luckily B.C. Civil Liberties Association has read the law and explains that the definition of an unapproved sign is open to interpretation. [1] Given the newly created laws, such as “it is cold, and rainy, so for your own safety go to a shelter away or go to jail,” one has to wonder if the B.C. CLA is on to something.
How open to interpretation is the amendment to the existing law? According to the B.C. CLA’s website [4] the issue resides with Bill13.
Here’s some info on Bill 13. [5] It’s rather long and detailed but worth a read.
Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act (No. 3) S.B.C. 2001, c.44
amended:
Part 31 – “sign” includes sign boards, advertisements, advertising devices or structures.
Part 32 (1)- “officer or employee of specified municipality or a person authorized by the council of a specified municipality has the authority to enter on a property, and to enter into property, WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE OWNER or occupier for purpose of enforcing, in accordance with subsection (4), the specified municipality’s bylaws in relation to signs”
Additionally,
“(3) A person may only exercise the authority in subsection (1) to enter into a place that is occupied as a private dwelling if ANY of the following applies:
(a) the occupier consents
(b) the specified municipality has given the occupier at least 24 hours’ written notice of the entry and the reasons for it”
So far we see a potential for 24 hrs written notice that someone can enter your home, without your consent, and claim you’re advertising or using a sign to advertise. I doubt the “we didn’t get the notice” will count as a viable means to prevent entry. Some people might not consider this a worry as they have no intent on advertising. There is one additional coverage in the amended law that is of concern and that is graffiti.
Part 33 covers graffiti. The same rules apply, “in accordance with subsection(3) [ note part b) ], the specified municipality’s bylaws in relation to graffiti, (2) A person (a) may only exercise the authority in subsection (1) at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner [meaning they can't enter at 3-am and they can't do it in July 2010], and (b) must take reasonable steps to advise the owner or occupier before entering the property.”
What can they do?
They can “enforce the specified municipality’s bylaws in relation to graffiti by removing, covering or altering the graffiti that is in contravention of these bylaws.” However, enforcement also includes up to 6 months in jail and fines up to $10,000. [4] [1][6].
The major change is a reduction from 30 days to 24 hours in the time either the police or bylaw enforcement person can give as notice for infractions of the bylaw.[6]
What’s the big deal?
Looking at part 34 you’ll see this is only exercised during February 1, 2010, to March 31, 2010. Olympic time.
As the media spreads the bylaw amendment information around, lots of people fear the actual intent is to remove anti-Olympic signs. The City of Vancouver participated in a Q&A session with The Province to explain the reasoning for the changes. [6].
A few things to note from the Q&A session are listed below:
- Non-Olympic advertisers are to be muffled because VANOC was given funds from Olympic advertisers to ensure exclusive advertising rights. I wonder what this will do to free market competition?
- The city is “only concerned about commercial signs … Peaceful anti-Olympic protest can take place and anti-Olympic flyers can be distributed.” I’m sure Montebello was deemed non-peaceful too, which would clearly enable the above laws to anti-Olympic material.
- Additionally, the City is not applying for warrants for removal of anti-Olympic signs. The amendment says nothing about requiring a warrant to enforce a bylaw.
- Repeatedly, the City explains their primary concern is ambush marketing, as this has happened in previous Olympic Games.
- Of interesting note is the City says “The Vancouver Police Department has a long history of respect for lawful protest and demonstrations. Police would not interfere with lawful protest.” [6]
The last statement sounds quite contradictory to the evidence that can be found on YouTube or a simple media search.
The bylaws are not the only concern, as the real concern comes from interpretations of the Olympic Charter. [7] Many people will undoubtedly be blogging the events that unfold, and not just regarding the event standings. There are a few rules to be aware of, whether blogging or protesting or simply hanging a “No Olympics” sign on your front lawn.
Rule 49 -3 “Only those persons accredited as media may act as journalists, reporters or in any other media capacity.” This means blogging about anything related to the Olympics, including dissent, is reserved for the ‘press’ only. Blogging can be considered “any other media capacity.”
Rule 51 – Advertising, Demonstrations, Propaganda
Now this is what relates to the above laws and has B.C. CLA concerned, especially part 3 “No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.”
The conflicting rules and bylaws definitely warrant concern. Rule 51 lists restrictions against demonstrations in both Olympic and non-Olympic areas and yet from [6] we see peaceful protests are OK. What’s the deal? Given the massive debt BC is placing themselves into and hoping to reap benefits of drawing advertising and foreign investment to BC, one has to wonder, whom will the City listen to, IOC’s Rules or their own statements?
In addition to bylaws and rules, we have many cameras installed for “protection,” the fact that CSIS has been hiring people for security at the Games since 2008 despite the normal 5 year training in Ottawa required [see careers section of their site], 5000 security guards in training by the RCMP, and the questionable handling of First Nations land use.
In short, the IOC’s rules state only accredited media folks can report anything related to the Olympics and don’t advertise or have any demonstrations. Be cautious what you blog about, what you photograph, and how strongly you voice your opinion, as a sign is not necessarily limited to a physical entity in your front yard. A sign can also include your website logo. And be sure to stay inside when it is cold or raining.
So much for the primary focus of the Games being about fair competition and promotion of good sportsmanship and living in a ‘free’ country.
References:
[1]www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/10/09/bc-antiolympic-sign-law-bccla.html
[2]www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2009-2013/2009AG0010000453.htm
[3]/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti
[4]www.bccla.org/pressreleases/09bill13.html
[5]www.leg.bc.ca/39th1st/1st_read/gov13-1.htm
[6]www.theprovince.com/City+Vancouver+explains+
Olympic+signage+bylaws/2124930/story.html
[7]www.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf