Human Right Commissions (HRC) in Canada are publicly funded quasi judicial bodies that have morphed into totalitarian regimes, hijacking the civil liberties of citizens who choose to exercise their right to be politically incorrect. They have become puppets to special interest groups and face retribution only from the court of public opinion, particularly when they have trampled upon the Western sacred ground of the right to free speech. Now they are seeking ways to expand territory by flexing their muscles in other arenas.
The Canadian Human Rights Commission has just announced that parents with young children have the right to not move in accommodating job demands. Now the Canadian National Railway is forced to rehire three women who were fired for refusing to transfer to a different province and pay them compensation for anguish. In the ruling:
Parents with young children are protected from discrimination under the rights act, and could have widespread implications for other employees.
Though this decision turned out favorably for the women involved, the ruling extends beyond the boundaries of their individual cases. The CHRC has made a sweeping declaration that extends to other employers. In a similar power grab, the Ontario HR Tribunal asserted its right to appoint faculty Deans in another stunning declaration this week.
This pronouncement stems from an application that was filed by Emily Carasco at the University of Windsor. In it she alleged sexism and racism in being denied the position of Dean. Though sexism and racism are evils to be fought, the tribunal’s handling of this case has set an unusual precedent:
This surprising power derives from the section of the Ontario Human Rights Code that empowers the tribunal to make “an order directing any party to the application to do anything that, in the opinion of the tribunal, the party ought to do to promote compliance with this Act.”
…there is no precedent for such a high-level job being dictated by a human rights tribunal, and academic freedom would surely figure prominently in arguments over such an order.
Powerful decisions are being left indiscriminately to the opinion of tribunals in a variety of settings, and now the HRC has entered into campus territory–a domain already hijacked by political correctness and leftist ideology.
Through a history of high profile cases, Canadian Human Rights Commissions have long earned the infamous reputation of unjustifiably targeting politically incorrect citizens for a shakedown. In one example, thanks to Ezra Levant–a Lawyer and formidable political activist– the Alberta HRC ended up on the receiving end of a shake down after dragging Levant before its tribunal. Levant won and went on to support Christian Minister Stephen Boisson who was sentenced to a lifetime gag order by the Alberta HRC for supposedly offending the gay community. Even the gay rights lobby Egale supported Boisson’s right to free speech. Levant then authored a stinging indictment of Canada ’s Human Rights Commissions in his book, Shakedown.
And who could forget the case of the B.C. Human Rights Commission case against Mark Steyn and Macleans magazine? Another waste of tax dollars from a trumped up Islamophobia complaint by the Canadian Islamic Congress.
The common ground between Levant , Macleans and Steyn: these forces are no easy prey like Stephen Boisson and other citizens who succumb to HRC violations of their democratic rights because they don’t have a big enough voice or pocket book to effectively fight back. Canadian Human Rights Commissions have too many sweeping powers and have spun out of control. The question remains who will rein them in, beyond the court of public opinion? Federal and provincial politicians in Canada need to unite and formulate an overhaul to the HR Commissions.