J23 The learned Mulenga J.S.C, McLachlin J in the Canadian also cited Supreme with approval the words Court case of R v. ZUNDEL of (1992) 10 C.C.R (284) 193 in which that learned Judge had this to say: “Tests the of free expression (majority) view frequently of what minority view. As Holmes the content particular popular prejudice” imperatively of is no a or right and person’s reason to an between unpopular might for “if more that the is it other any than “excite it protection constitution the of speech deny attachment for call a contest J. stated over 50 years ago, the fact principle any is there is true involve principle of free thought - not free thought for those who agree for the thought that we have”.... Thus the with us but freedom majority’s perception smothering the protection the person which entirely offering certainty value certain protection. given that fundamental most to the person, land on its face accords be the that there The criterion can we should, be no of falsity and given the difficulty of conclusively falsity. freedom hitherto Applying of the broad, expression adhered to by guaranteed this Court, law of this by belief, in my falls short for of this sometimes have determining total interpretation purposive a deny justification can statements false we Before perception..... minority from interest public or truth of the to preclude serves..... of expression of freedom guarantee (the I cannot of the Constitution) accede to the