ALCCA Granted Intervener Status in Significant Criminal Appeal
- ALCCA Staff
- 2 days ago
- 2 min read
The Alliance of Canadians Combatting Antisemitism (ALCCA) was recently granted leave to intervene in an appeal to be heard by Ontario's highest court brought by the Crown against Leslie Bory.
Over a period of two years, Bory posted videos online in which he used inflammatory and derogatory language. He called for his viewers to engage in violence against Jews. Police found multiple firearms and over 20,000 rounds of ammunition in his home.
Bory was convicted by a Brantford jury of advocating genocide, wilful promotion of hatred, and uttering threats against Jews. However, the trial judge directed an acquittal on the charge of public incitement of hatred in a public place likely to lead to a breach of the peace. The judge ruled that this offence required proof that the incitement took place at a physical location attended by others, not on social media.
The Crown (the prosecution) appealed the acquittal based on what it characterized as an erroneous legal ruling. The Crown submits that online spaces are the new public square and the definition of “public place” in the Criminal Code should be interpreted accordingly.
That definition includes “any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, express or implied.”
ALCCA sought to intervene in support of the Crown’s position. Intervention in criminal non-constitutional cases is not lightly granted in the Court of Appeal. Bory opposed the proposed intervention.
However, Associate Chief Fairburn was satisfied that ALCCA, and the groups on whose behalf it sought leave to intervene, are well-recognized groups with expertise on these issues.
In the Associate Chief Justice’s view, ALCCA’s proposed submissions were sufficiently distinct from those of the Crown so as to be useful to the Court. She noted that the Crown’s written submissions largely deal with other issues, most particularly the appeals by both the Crown and Bory against the sentence imposed.
ALCCA’s proposed submissions, by contrast, deal with the statutory interpretation of the public incitement charge in detail and suggest analytical frameworks from other contexts that the appeal panel could rely on in considering this issue. These submissions do not duplicate existing arguments but represent a different perspective likely to assist the Court.
The decision of the Court to grant intervention status represents a welcome development. There have already been lower court cases that recognize that public incitement of hatred can and often does take place on social media platforms. Indeed, social media represents a highly effective and thus dangerous means of disseminating hate quickly to a large audience that includes those inspired to act violently. As we know, Jews and Israelis are disproportionately targeted on social media platforms. In ALCCA’s view, it is critically important that the Court of Appeal rectify the flawed legal ruling in the court below.
ALCCA’s key arguments are contained in the Intervener’s Factum, available here.
This appeal will be argued in November 2026. ALCCA’s Chair, Mark Sandler will make oral submissions on behalf of the intervener. Rochelle Direnfeld, ALCCA’s Senior Criminal Counsel, provided the Court of Appeal as affiant with the evidence in support of the intervention motion.