Levant has stepped on more than a few toes with his caustic critique of Jewish groups that, he says, support human rights commissions’ restrictions on free speech in order to tackle what he considers to be a non-existent threat posed by neo-Nazi nobodies posting material on the Internet.

But in his recent best-selling book, Shakedown, McLelland &Stewart, the Calgary-based author goes further, alleging that in the 1960s, CanadianJewish Congress even bankrolled the Canadian Nazi Party because it wanted to justify its own existence by having a real enemy to contend with.

That prompted a response from Congress, which  pointed out Levant relied on a mistaken Maclean’s article from 1966. The extent of the “bankrolling” was an expense incurred by a private investigator hired by Congress to investigate the Nazi group who bought a bottle of rum, stated a letter from Congress co-president Rabbi Reuven Bulka. Rabbi Bulka went on, however, to acknowledge that Levant’s book “does open the door to a potentially serious debate on human rights law.”

Indeed, in Shakedown, Levant offers a compelling case why the hate speech provisions in human rights legislation should be abolished, if not the commissions themselves. The commissions have become superfluous in pursuing their original mandates of ending discrimination in the provision of apartments and jobs. Employment and landlord and tenant legislation already does that, he says.

What we have now is a bureaucracy staffed by left-wing activists expanding the reach of the state to limit legitimate expressions of free speech to satisfy  groups or individuals who feel aggrieved. That’s not a bargain most Canadians feel comfortable with, Levant argues.

In an interview with The CJN, Levant said much of the work of human rights commissions (there are 14 in Canada, one for each province and territory and one federal body) has gone under the radar. The mainstream media has largely ignored them, and most Canadians know little about them until they have to face a complaint themselves. “People feel trapped” by the commissions and “appalled at the lack of natural justice,” he said.

Levant’s own run-in with the Alberta commission came in 2006 as a result of the now-defunct Western Standard magazine, which he published, printing cartoons that depicted the Muslim prophet Muhammad. Publication of the cartoons in Denmark inflamed the Muslim world and led to riots and deaths. The Western Standard made an editorial decision to print the cartoons so its readers could see for themselves what had prompted such a violent reaction.

Around the same time, columnist Mark Steyn and Maclean’s magazine were hauled before the B.C. Human Rights Commission after the magazine ran excerpts from Steyn’s best-seller, America Alone, which examined the threat posed by radical Islamists. The two cases became causes celebre and shone a light on the commissions.

Levant maintains both cases were dismissed because of the notoriety attached to them, but in most instances, victims capitulate because the deck is stacked against them. Complainants don’t incur any expense, while it is costly to present a defence. Adjudicators aren’t neutral, but are often political activists who side with the complainant and who have no particular legal training. Disclosure is hit and miss. (Jewish groups argue the commissions should be reformed, not abolished.)

Dragged before the Alberta Human Rights Commission, Levant made it “my personal mission” to repeal the provision limiting free speech.

“But that’s not enough,” he said. The vast majority of cases don’t deal with allegations of hate.

For example: in British Columbia, a woman was fired by Macdonald’s because a skin condition prevented her from washing her hands as often as mandated by the restaurant chain. She alleged discrimination based on a disability and, amazingly, won a judgement of $50,000.

In another case, a pizza delivery woman complained about the violent, sexually explicit music being played in the workplace. She won a settlement of $3,500 four years after the restaurant manager agreed to change the music from CDs to radio.

According to Levant, Human rights commissions have elevated everyday disputes to the level of human rights. But it is their assault on free expression that should concern Canadians most, he said.

And in that area, Jewish organizations are out of step with their constituencies. “I don’t think Jews are for censorship,”he said. “As a minority, we were subject to censorship.”

Levant dismisses the argument that anti-Semitic words could lead to genocide. “The presence of anti-Semitic words did not lead to the Holocaust,” he said. “It was laws passed by the Nazis that led to genocide.” You are mistaken if you believe that a government that would kill you would be deterred by the rulings of human rights commissions, he added.

The night before his interview with The CJN, Levant was on a panel in London that attracted 600 people to hear a discussion on free speech and the commissions. His book is number 3 on the Globe and Mail’s best-seller list. Editorials across the country have come out against the commissions’ restrictions on free speech, as did an investigation by Prof. Richard Moon for the federal commission. Alberta is taking another look at them.

“There are very positive signs.I think change is going to come,” Levant said.