Dalhousie Law Journal


privacy, Canada, child pornography, hate propoganda, obscenity, state, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms


Privacy is approached differently in the Canadian case law on child pornography than in hate propaganda and obscenity cases. Privacy analyses in all three contexts focus considerable attention on the interests of the individuals accused, particularly in relation to minimizing state intrusion on private spheres of activity However, the privacy interests of the.equality-seeking communities targeted by these forms of communication are more directly addressed in child pornography cases than in hate propaganda and obscenity cases. One possible explanation for this difference is that hate propaganda and obscenity simply do not affect the privacy interests of targeted groups and their members. In contrast, this paper suggests that this difference in approach reflects the adoption of an individualistic approach to privacy that may unnecessarily place it in tension with equality. In so doing, it sets the stage for an exploration of more social approaches to privacy that may better enable exploration of privacy's intersections with equality and its collective value to the community as a whole.