The year was 1991 when Canadian authorities began seizing copies of the American magazine, Hustler. This led to a series of court battles that pitted free speech advocates against those who believed pornography should be restricted. One such case involved Larry Flynt, the founder of Hustler Magazine. Flynt argued that the seizures violated his First Amendment right to freedom of expression and were an example of unjustified state interference in private affairs.
On July 24th, 1991, customs officers seized a shipment of 5000 copies of Hustler at Vancouver's Pacific National Exhibition. The magazine had been sent from Los Angeles for sale at the exhibition's annual fair. Customs officials claimed the issue contained obscene material under Canada's Criminal Code, which prohibits the publication and distribution of indecent materials. According to the code, "every person who publishes, prints, distributes or has in their possession for publication, print or distribution any book, pamphlet, writing, drawing, painting representation or other thing containing one or more drawings, photographs or paintings that depict any sex act" is guilty of a crime.
Flynt took legal action against the seizure by filing a lawsuit against the Attorney General of Canada in British Columbia Supreme Court. He argued that the magazine did not meet the legal definition of obscenity and that he had a constitutional right to distribute it. The court agreed with him and ordered the government to pay $35,0000 in damages plus $75,0000 in legal fees. However, this decision was later overturned on appeal.
In February 1992, another shipment of Hustler was seized in Toronto. This time, Flynt challenged the seizure in Federal Court. Again, he lost but appealed his case to the Canadian Supreme Court. In June 1992, the Supreme Court ruled that the Criminal Code does not provide adequate guidance regarding what constitutes obscenity. It also found that free speech rights are protected even when unpopular messages are involved. As a result, customs officers were instructed to exercise discretion when deciding whether materials should be confiscated.
However, Hustler continued to face difficulties entering Canada after the ruling. A third shipment was seized in December 1992 at Pearson International Airport. This led to yet another court challenge from Flynt's attorneys. They claimed that the seizure violated their client's charter right to freedom of expression under section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Once again, they won their case, but only temporarily as an Ontario Superior Court judge reversed her own decision following an intervention by the Crown prosecutor.
Flynt v. Attorney General of Canada is one example among many cases involving censorship and free speech in Canada during this period. The debate continues today about how much government oversight is necessary for media content and what role citizens have in determining public morality.