Roger-Luc Chayer (Images : Facebook of Guillaume Marois / https://www.facebook.com/guillaume.marois.5)
Who is Guillaume Marois?
Guillaume Marois is a demography researcher known for his work on population projections, migration, demographic aging, and microsimulation methods. Originally from Quebec, he studied demography at the Université de Montréal before earning a PhD from the Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS) in 2014.
After completing his doctorate, he undertook a postdoctoral fellowship at the Université de Montréal before joining the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), an international research center based in Austria focused on major global challenges. Since 2019, he has also been a professor at the Asian Demographic Research Institute, where he continues to study international demographic change.
His main research areas include population projections, population aging and its economic and social impacts, immigration and its effects on demographic dynamics, residential mobility, as well as statistical methods and demographic microsimulation.
In Quebec, Guillaume Marois is notably known for co-authoring with Benoît Dubreuil the essay Le Remède imaginaire – Pourquoi l’immigration ne sauvera pas le Québec (2011). The authors argue that immigration alone cannot sustainably address certain challenges related to population aging and labour market needs. The book generated significant public debate in Quebec.
From a scientific standpoint, Guillaume Marois is the author or co-author of numerous peer-reviewed academic articles published in international journals. His work is widely cited in academic literature and used in research on demography and public policy.
He is recognized for his contributions to quantitative demography, particularly in the development of long-term population projection models.
A Facebook post on a publication and its historical references
Communication on social media platforms can lead to different interpretations depending on context and audience. Certain online publications may generate debate due to the references they contain and the framework in which they circulate.
In a Facebook post originating from an account presenting a montage resembling a news media format and referencing La Presse in a parodic manner, content including a reference to the leader of the Parti Québécois, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, was shared. The montage also included textual elements referring to a historical figure of the 20th century.
This article focuses on the dissemination of this post and the reactions it may have generated in the public sphere.
It is specified that the individual mentioned is not the original author of the content. The article focuses on the fact that they chose to share it on Facebook.
Who was Pol Pot?
Pol Pot (1925–1998), born Saloth Sâr, was the leader of the Khmer Rouge and the ruler of Cambodia from 1975 to 1979. Driven by a radical communist ideology, he sought to transform the country into a classless agrarian society. To achieve this, his regime evacuated cities, abolished currency, closed schools and hospitals, and forced millions of people into labour camps.
His regime is responsible for one of the worst episodes of mass killings and crimes against humanity of the 20th century. Executions, famine, disease, and forced labour caused the deaths of an estimated 1.5 to 2 million Cambodians, nearly a quarter of the country’s population. The Khmer Rouge regime ended in 1979 following the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia.
The crimes against humanity committed under Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge between 1975 and 1979 are considered one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century. In less than four years, approximately 1.5 to 2 million people died, representing nearly 25% of the Cambodian population at the time.
The regime emptied cities, abolished currency, closed schools, hospitals, and places of worship, and eliminated private property. Millions of people were deported to labour camps where they endured forced labour, famine, and inhumane living conditions.
Those considered “enemies of the people” were systematically arrested, tortured, and executed. Intellectuals, teachers, doctors, civil servants, religious figures, ethnic minorities, and anyone suspected of opposition were particularly targeted. Historical accounts report that even wearing glasses or speaking a foreign language could be interpreted as a sign of intellectual status, exposing individuals to persecution.
The thousands of mass graves discovered after the fall of the regime, known as the “Killing Fields”, illustrate the scale of the atrocities. The crimes committed under Pol Pot remain among the deadliest in modern history.
After the collapse of the regime in 1979, Cambodia experienced one of the largest refugee crises of the late 20th century. An estimated 600,000 to 700,000 Cambodians fled the country in the years that followed. At the height of the crisis, more than 300,000 refugees lived in camps along the Cambodia–Thailand border.
Through international resettlement programs, more than 500,000 Cambodians were permanently relocated abroad. The United States received the largest share, with over 150,000 refugees, followed by France with around 60,000. Australia accepted between 30,000 and 35,000, while Canada received nearly 20,000 Cambodian refugees.
Overall, the Pol Pot regime resulted in the deaths of approximately 1.5 to 2 million people out of an estimated population of about 8 million. Hundreds of thousands of survivors were also forced to flee Cambodia to rebuild their lives abroad.
Given the history of the Pol Pot regime, such comparisons may be perceived as highly sensitive and potentially offensive, particularly by survivors, their families, and members of the Cambodian diaspora. When such references are circulated by public figures or academics, they can also prompt broader discussions about the impact and responsibility involved in sharing historically charged comparisons in public discourse.
Millions of Cambodians were executed by Pol Pot (Google Images)
Mr. Marois’s reactions
After reviewing a first draft of the article, Mr. Marois reacted several times on social media and in exchanges with the journalist. He notably used an insulting term toward him, stated that he was “too old for social media,” questioned his decency, and mentioned the possibility of pursuing legal action.
During exchanges prior to publication, Mr. Marois requested the addition of a paragraph to the article. This request was accepted. A right of reply was also offered to him, but he chose not to use it. Subsequently, on his Facebook page, Mr. Marois published the following message:
“Believe it or not, there’s a Roger-Luc Chayer who didn’t understand my sarcasm and took the time to write a long defamatory article about me. There really should be an age limit for social media.”
Following this publication, some users posted comments directed at the journalist. Among them, Kiki Caron wrote: “it would at least require a certification in literacy,” while Danielle Boudreau added: “And a minimum IQ!” One commenter asked twice to see the link to the article in question, but the link was not provided.
These comments were posted by third parties in reaction to Mr. Marois’s publication.
Let us be clear: Mr. Marois and I agree that the image in question goes too far, but where we disagree is in how it should be addressed. It seems to me that rather than insulting a journalist, he could have used the opportunity to shift the discussion to where it should have been, namely: does sharing a highly controversial image contribute to reinforcing it rather than critically challenging it?
Understanding SLAPP lawsuits in Quebec law
In Quebec, a SLAPP lawsuit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) is a legal action primarily intended to intimidate, silence, or discourage a person or media outlet from participating in a matter of public interest, rather than to genuinely seek redress for harm suffered.
Quebec is one of the few jurisdictions in North America to have adopted specific legislation to combat this type of legal action. Since 2009, the Code of Civil Procedure of Quebec has allowed courts to quickly dismiss proceedings that constitute an abuse of the justice system.
A lawsuit may be considered a SLAPP when it presents several of the following characteristics:
- the legal grounds appear weak or are mainly intended to impose high legal costs;
- it targets a journalist, media outlet, citizen, organization, or activist speaking on a matter of public interest;
- the damages claimed are clearly disproportionate to the alleged harm;
- its apparent purpose is to create intimidation or discourage criticism;
- the plaintiff has significantly greater financial resources than the defendant, creating an imbalance.
Quebec courts assess whether a claim is abusive. A case may be deemed abusive when it is manifestly unfounded, frivolous, dilatory, or when it misuses the justice system. If abuse is established, a judge may:
- dismiss the case at an early stage;
- suspend proceedings;
- order the plaintiff to pay an advance for the defendant’s legal costs;
- order payment of extrajudicial fees and other damages;
- in some cases, award punitive damages when justified.
For media and journalists, protection against SLAPP lawsuits is particularly important, as it helps preserve freedom of expression and press freedom, both protected under the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The fact that a person mentions legal action does not automatically mean it constitutes a SLAPP. Only a court can determine this based on the facts and applicable law.
*The author of this article is not affiliated with any municipal, provincial, or federal political party.
*The author sought legal advice from Me Claude Chamberland prior to publication.