Emilie Smith, a spokesperson with ministry of the attorney general, said Peel police's formal request to charge Johnston was granted on July 21.

Smith would not comment further on the "specific matter" as it before the court.

However, Smith said, "Comments and actions that promote hate are deeply offensive and will not be tolerated in our society."

Johnston has stirred up quite a bit of controversy – most recently, his protesting of Muslim prayer in Peel District School Board this year. His criticism of the religious practice in schools, and the board's handling of the matter, contributed to him being banned from all Peel board properties.

OCLA researcher Denis Rancourt became aware of Johnston's charge through recent media reports. He feels that the charge itself that Johnston is facing – Section 319(2) of the criminal code – is an "obscene law."

"Democratic societies should not have…criminal code provisions where the state is not ever having to prove actual harm, physical or psychological, to any actual person that they bring forth as a person that was harmed," he said.

"There isn't even a harm to talk about; it's all at the emotional level and harm against the public at large."

The petition suggests that instead of potentially jailing an individual for unpopular opinions, the government should allow these matters to be resolved through public debate.

Smith noted that very careful consideration goes into each individual case under Section 319(2) before a charge is laid such as permission from the Attorney General.

"This requirement offers a safeguard for free expression and can be seen as Parliament's recognition of the important, competing values, which are at stake in such prosecutions," Smith said.

She added that there must also be reasonable prospect of conviction and public interest before permission to lay the charge in question is given.

Click here to view the petition.