As is usual in the bizarre world of 'human rights' hate-speech persecutions, that which is determined to be most damaging to free society is contained in the Appendices to Judgment of the BCHRT Abrams v. Collins Hearing
itself. (see above)
The site which contains that Judgment, The Nizkor Project
, is an excellent resource devoted to ensuring that 'Holocaust denial' is countered by ready public access to information.
It's worth noting that before internet communication allowed such access to information from the comfort of one's home, that the average person would be hard pressed to unearth such documents absent access to a law library.
For this reason, it is essential that the internet remain as free from government control as is currently the case (given that Bill C-304 abolishes CHRA Sec 13, and in turn similar Provincial legislation)
In the case of Doug Collins, The Nizkor Project
also serves to preserve the 'Nuremberg Laws'
nature of 'human rights' hate-speech legislation, which stains the reputation of the Canadian Justice system
Tribunal member Tom W. Patch wrote:
IN THE MATTER OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS CODE
R.S.B.C. 1996, c.210 (as amended)
AND IN THE MATTER of a complaint before
the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal
B E T W E E N:Harry Abrams
A N D:
North Shore Free Press Ltd. doing business as "North Shore
and Doug Collins
A N D:
Deputy Chief Commissioner of the British Columbia Human
A N D:Attorney General of British Columbia
A N D:
League for Human Rights of B'Nai Brith Canada
INTERVENORREASONS FOR DECISION
Tribunal Member: Tom W. Patch
Counsel for the Complainant: Thomas W. Bulmer
Counsel for the Respondents: David F. Sutherland
Counsel for the Deputy Chief Commissioner: Angela Westmacott
and Deirdre A. Rice
Counsel for the Attorney General: Lisa J. Mrozinski
Counsel for B'Nai Brith Canada: Marvin Kurz
Place and date of hearing: Victoria, British Columbia, July
20, 21, 22, and 24, 1998
 In summary, I order the following:
1.That the Respondents Doug Collins and the North Shore Newscease publishing statements that are likely to expose Jewish
persons to hatred and contempt and refrain from committing
the same or a similar contravention
2.That Doug Collins and the North Shore News pay $2,000 to the
Complainant Harry Abrams as compensation for the injury they
have caused to his dignity and self respect;
3.That the North Shore News publish in one of its next three editions the Summary that accompanies these reasons
The Respondents are jointly and severally liable for the damages.
 As I noted in the introduction to these reasons,issues related to the constitutional validity of the Code
were severed from the issues that I have decided in these
reasons. I reserve the right to hear and decide those
Tom W. Patch, Tribunal Member
Vancouver, British Columbia
February 2, 199
Note that the column Collins penned in January 12.2001, A MATTER OF JUSTICE - Jan 12, 2001
, which I posted earlier in this thread, noted that:"The B.C. Appeal Court has just decided, in its wisdom, that I cannot have a judicial review of this province’s outrageous heresy laws without first going back to the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal that censored and fined me. It should then consider whether what it did was constitutional!"
As noted in paragraph 100 of the Judgment itself, Tribunal Member Tom W. Patch had reserved the right to hear and decide the Constitutional validity of the Code
[BCHRA Sec. 7], and the BC Appeal Court went along with that charade.
That travesty of Justice occurred under the direct supervision of the then Attorney General of British Columbia, MLA Ujjal Dosanjh
, who would later become the (NDP) Premier of BC, and still later a Liberal MP whose legal credentials were such that he sat on the Oct. 5, 2009 'Standing Committee on Section 13'
attended by Ezra Levant
and Mark Steyn
The BCHRTribunal first ever 'hate-speech' Hearing, 'CJC v. Collins & North Shore News' was launched in May 1994, and heard in May 1997 (also heard by Tribunal member Tom W. Patch), and concerned a single column Collins had penned in March 1994 entitled 'Hollywood propaganda'
The BCHRTribunal dismissed that Complaint, after a 5 day Hearing which cost the Respondents over $70,000 for Counsel fees. At the time that expense may have seemed almost worthwhile, as it defeated the attempt to censor print media through 'lawfare'.
However, immediately following the CJC v Collins Hearing, another Complaint was entertained by the BCHRT, this time Abrams v. Collins & NSN
, for 4 columns spread over a 6 month period, and including the column heard in the earlier BCHRT CJC v Collins Complaint
So, to summarize, the first two ''human right' hate-speech Complaints heard by the BCHRTribunal were both against the same Respondent(s), both contained the same Complaint material, both were heard by at least one of the same Tribunal members, and both required that the Respondent fund their own defense.
Upon receiving the second Complaint, Collins and the North Shore News realized that these Hearings could, and likely would, continue to be entertained by the BCHRT, at taxpayer expense for the Complainants. They issued a statement challenging the Constitutional validity of the Code, and declined to attend the Abrams v. Collins Hearing.
That second Hearing led to the Patch Judgment indicated above, upholding the Complaint, and reserving the right to Hear and Decide the Constitutional issues
The two Hearings succeeded in their primary objective, which was to place constraints on 'free speech' in print media which did not fall under the auspices of the Criminal Code.
In doing so, a chill descended upon print media across Canada which held fast until efforts to punish Western Standard/Ezra Levant for publishing the 'Muslim cartoons', and later, Macleans/Mark Steyn for 'Islamophobic articles' brought the entire apparatus of 'human rights' hate-speech persecutions to broad public attention.
A decade later, FreeDominion - itself subject to a CHRC 'human right' hate-speech Complaint filed by Marie-Line Gentes - serves as an example of how an online forum, hosted by honourable Canadians Connie and Mark Fournier, can serve the cause of Canadian Justice long ignored by mainstream media, civil rights groups, and law societies in Canada.
Bravo Connie and Mark !