Toronto: Civil liberties teams, Booker Prize-winning Canadian writer Margaret Atwood and Tesla founder Elon Musk are amongst those that have come out towards the “draconian” so-called Online Harms Bill launched by the federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

The invoice was launched earlier than the House of Commons late final month however has gained nationwide consideration after celebrated writer Margaret Atwood described it as “Orwellian” in a publish on X just lately. “The possibilities for revenge false accusations + thoughtcrime stuff are sooo inviting! Trudeau’s Orwellian online harms bill,” the two-time Booker Prize winner posted. She was referring to British writer George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four the place the autocratic regime considers any thought outdoors its ideology as a thoughtcrime.

That view gave the impression to be shared by Tesla founder and government chair of X Elon Musk, who posted, in response to an article on the invoice, “This is insane.”

Canada’s Minister of Justice and Attorney General Arif Virani, an Indo-Canadian, who’s shepherding the invoice by parliament, tried to defend it on Tuesday. During an occasion in Toronto, he mentioned in French, “It includes expressions of detestation and vilification. It does not include insults, offensive comments, or jokes that are not very polite,” in line with the outlet CBC News.

The authorities’s place has not impressed teams just like the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) which has described among the invoice’s provisions as “draconian”. In a launch after the invoice was tabled, CCLA’s government director and common counsel Noa Mendelsohn Aviv mentioned its “initial assessment reveals that the bill includes overbroad violations of expressive freedom, privacy, protest rights, and liberty”.

“The broad criminal prohibitions on speech in the bill risk stifling public discourse and criminalising political activism,” he famous, including, “The bill imposes draconian penalties for certain types of expression, including life imprisonment for a very broad and vaguely defined offence of ‘incitement to genocide’, and five years of jail time for other broadly defined speech acts. This not only chills free speech but also undermines the principles of proportionality and fairness in our legal system.”

The Canadian Constitution Foundation said that the invoice will “significantly hamper constitutionally-protected expression”.

In a publish on its web site, it added, “The mere threat of human rights complaints and fines for Canadians and social media companies will chill large amounts of otherwise protected speech.”

The authorities has argued that the proposed laws will “create stronger protections for kids online and better safeguard everyone in Canada from online hate” and “sets out a new vision for safer and more inclusive participation online.”