The plaintiff sued over an online political message board post describing him as one of the Taliban’s more vocal supporters.
The court held that the words referred to the plaintiff, were published by both the original poster and the forum operators, and were prima facie defamatory in the context of an active armed conflict involving Canadian forces.
However, applying the modern fair comment framework, the court found the statement was recognizable as comment on a matter of public interest, grounded in the plaintiff’s well-known public advocacy concerning Omar Khadr and Afghanistan, and capable of being honestly expressed by a prejudiced or exaggerated commentator.
Allegations of malice and spoliation were rejected.
The action was dismissed, with each side bearing its own costs.
