"Human Rights" Acts the best tools for bullying.
Look at the Alberta Human Rights, Citizenship
and Multicultural Act http://www.qp.gov.ab.ca/Documents/acts/H14.CFM.
Can't you feel sorry for me? An activist
has hurt my feelings and I felt victimized and thereby
discriminated against. He said things about me - about
my beliefs that are painful. I now have two choices:
I can attempt to file a Human Rights Complaint. Or.
I could get a life.
You see if my feelings are hurt
and I feel discriminated against due to my "religious
orientation" then surely I must have a right
and entitlement to have an appointed group of
people in the Human Rights Commission at taxpayers’
expense, intervene and force the activist to pay me
compensation for my feelings. This is really not bullying
is it? Or is it more like extortion?
How can I prove my feeling are hurt?
I don't need to prove it. I just say it is so and it
is so. Do I need to provide truth? No, not under the
functions of the Human Rights Act. See "any statement.."
Section 3(1) states that if something "indicates
discrimination" and "is likely to expose
to hatred or contempt" is a basis for action.
Of course it is solely up to the person(s)
appointed to the Commission to decide unilaterally if
they interpret my hurt and discrimination sufficient
to even open a case.
Of course these "Commission"
people could use section 3(2) [Nothing in this section
shall be deemed to interfere with the free expression
of opinion on any subject.], to deny my case. In
their interpretation - solely based upon their "feelings"
or philosophy they could decide the activist had the
right to express his opinion about me and my beliefs.
The Act fails to stipulate what grounds they make such
decisions upon.
Then they could use section 3C ..."if
the statement ...is not derogatory, offensive or otherwise
improper." to determine if my feelings are
hurt or if I was discriminated against. Derogatory in
whose eyes? Offensive to whom? Improper based upon what
test? This is law – no, it is grade school banter.
Is this the best language that government legal heads
could come up with?
But my concerns about the Alberta Human
Rights, Citizenship and Multicultural Act do not end
here.
Read a few sections in the Act that
will startle any intelligent person who respects freedom
and equality under the law, one of the main protections
which our Charter says are guaranteed to every citizen.
Alberta Act quoted: (note our red
highlights and blue danger
comments)
"Bylaws 17(1) The Commission
may make bylaws respecting
(a) the carrying out of its powers,
duties and functions under this Act, and
(b) procedural matters related
to the handling of complaints under this Act, including
procedural matters related to the proceedings before
human rights panels. ((
are they totally unaccountable then - make up your
own rules !!!!!))
Procedural rules:
(2) Evidence may be given before
a human rights panel in any manner that the panel
considers appropriate, and the
panel is not bound by the rules of law respecting
evidence in judicial proceedings. ((
rule of law does not apply to this bunch??))
Powers of panel:
2) A human rights panel may make
any order as to costs that it
considers appropriate. ((
whatever it wants with NO parameters??))
Protection from giving evidence:
40(1) No
member of the Commission, nor the director
of the Commission or any other employee mentioned
in section 18, shall be required
by any court to give evidence relative to information
obtained for the purposes of this Act.
(2) No proceeding under this Act
shall be deemed invalid by reason of any defect in
form or any technical irregularity. ((
so they are untouchable regardless of their errors??))
Interpretation:
In this Act
44(1) definitions: It is very notable
that the main terms in section 3.1 a,b are NOT defined.
So what does that mean? It means
that the Commissioners will unilaterally determine what
'hate', 'discrimination' and 'contempt' mean. And
since under Procedural Rules "(2) Evidence may
be given before a human rights panel in any manner that
the panel considers appropriate, and the panel is not
bound by the rules of law respecting evidence in judicial
proceedings.", the panel
(in essence one person perhaps, who is not trained as
a judge), can violate the laws respecting evidence and
make their own laws in violation of our Charter. That
is frightening at any time. But to have a person appointed
who may not be trained in law and is not trained in
judicial matters and not bound by certain law is complete
violation of citizenship rights under Canada's Charter.
Three solutions to these grave matters?
1) rescind this terrible piece of legislation
that allows violations of the Charter, or
2) remove section 3 - discrimination
re publications, notices" and "statements"
that could even be private opinion and
3) demand legislators extensively narrow
the parameters and powers of these appointed "Commissioners".
What was the original purpose of such
a law? [Discrimination re goods, services, accommodation,
facilities, tenancy, pay]
If you are
concerned - TAKE ACTION:
Write and call the Attorney
General of Alberta demanding that
this atrocious law be corrected immediately.
Ron Stevens - Phone: (403) 216-5421
Fax: (403) 216-5423
calgary.glenmore@assembly.ab.ca
Call Ed Stelmach and
insist he do what he promised,
represent all Albertans, and that he hold a full and
fair review of this legislation.
Phone: (780) 632-6840 and 780- 427-2251
Fax: (780) 632-6888
fortsaskatchewan.vegreville@assembly.ab.ca
((The Conservatives are so proud of
their Lobbyist Act for accountability but let the bullies
at HRC run wild))
|
