Proposed B.C. law would allow big fines, jail time for Olympics violators

By Tamsyn Burgmann (CP) – 14 hours ago

VANCOUVER, B.C. — Powers that would allow B.C. municipalities directly involved in the Olympics to "swiftly" seize illegal signs and levy penalties of up to $10,000 or hand out up to six months jail time for violators are too broad, says a civil liberties group.

The province introduced legislation this week that would give municipal officers the ability to enter private residences and remove or cover what's deemed to be illegal signage after giving only 24 hours notice.

Owing to vague wording in Vancouver's city bylaw, the group fears the stiff penalties - yet to be adopted - will be used during the 2010 Games to stifle anti-Olympic sentiment.

"(It) runs the risk of coming across as overly aggressive in terms of law enforcement," said Robert Holmes, president of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

"(And it) runs the risk of provoking a backlash from people who are strongly committed to whatever their point of view might be."

While the city of Vancouver has already passed a bylaw stipulating illegal signs and graffiti will be prohibited come February, it's the province that grants the municipality these associated powers.

The changes come as one of several amendments to Bill 13, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2009. While it's only at first reading, legislators could approve it by late November, meaning Vancouver, Richmond and Whistler would then be allowed to modify their own bylaws.

Bill Bennett, B.C.'s minister of community and rural affairs, said the legislation is a temporary measure that provides a faster way of removing illegal signs during the short time frame the Games are underway. But he said content enforcement falls under the purview of the municipalities themselves.

The new laws won't target free speech, but are instead aimed at curbing advertising by unauthorized sellers looking to use the Olympic brand to make a quick buck, said Vancouver Coun. Geoff Meggs.

"The concern of the critics is it's a draconian attack on free speech, which we completely reject," he said.

"The whole focus is against commercial activity, not political activity or expression of opinion."

But what constitutes an "illegal" sign isn't clearly spelled out in the city bylaws, Meggs admitted.

"The wording of the bylaw was broad, our legal advice is that that was necessary. It's that breadth that has upset the Civil Liberties Association," he said.

"(But) we will be using it in a way that respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

Holmes believes the approach was deliberate.

"It's easy for them to say they'll only (enforce the law) in a nice fashion and 'Please trust us,' but that's not how these things work," he said.

As for the penalties, violators would only be handed the maximum in an extreme case, Meggs said, adding he's supportive of the hefty financial penalty as an "important" deterrent.

Vancouver council had already expressed approval for adopting such powers last spring, but still must vote on whether to actually change its bylaw once the law is passed by the provincial government.

Copyright © 2009 The Canadian Press.