Is the intent of this government to try to use the commission’s authority to engage in cases in other provinces, or even other countries, regarding human rights?

It has been stated to me the importance of the new Human Rights Commission(er) because … educating the public and preventing discrimination not only avoids harmful acts, it also has potential of reducing adversarial and costly legal disputes. 

BUT … do we now have a Trifecta of confusion?  Under the heading of Human Rights, we will have the following, it seems:

Human Rights CODE:

… which is there essentially to protect people’s rights to be involved in the economic, social, political and cultural life, and to ensure all are equal in dignity and rights.  The Code is also there to prevent discrimination, to help in removing on-going discriminatory inequality, and to provide a means of redress for individuals that are discriminated against. 

Human Rights TRIBUNAL:

The nuts and bolts of the Human Rights Tribunal is the timely and fair resolution of human rights complaints.  The Tribunal is an independent, quasi-judicial body, and for those like me who were unaware, it was created by the BC Human Rights Code. It accepts, screens, mediates, and decides on human rights complaints.  If there is no resolution or dismissal of the complaint, then a hearing will be held by the Tribunal.

It is important to note that those involved with the Tribunal must act under the Standards of Conducts for Public Service Employees.  It states that they must exhibit the highest standards of conduct. Their conduct must instill confidence and trust and not bring the BC Public Service into disrepute. The honesty and integrity of the BC Public Service demands the impartiality of employees in the conduct of their duties.

And soon, we will once again have the Human Rights COMMISSION … which actually sounds in many cases, an awful lot like the role of the Human Rights Code.  The Human Rights Code Amendment Act, indicates the Commission(er) will be responsible to promote and protect human rights by doing the following:

• promote the elimination of discriminatory practices, policies and programs 
•  develope resources, policies and guidelines to prevent and eliminate discriminatory practices (on its own as well as with individuals and other organizations) as well as undertake and support research respecting human rights 
•  make recommendations on policy, programs, or legislation that may be inconsistent with the code … as well as develope and deliver public information and education about human rights 
•  promote compliance with international human rights obligations (more on this point coming up in a moment) 
• intervene in complaints under section 22.1 … and in any proceeding in any court

I noted that the proposed legislation states:

… the commissioner may not file a complaint with the tribunal under section 21, but may assist a person or group of persons with any aspect of a complaint under that section. In reading about its responsibilities however, there appears to be opportunity for greyness on that point.

When I asked BC Liberal MLA John Rustad about the new commission, he posed some interesting thoughts himself … and his own questions: 

“I think it is fair to say that everyone should, and does, believe human rights, and protecting those rights, is an important role of our democracy. The constitution, as well as the Human Rights Tribunal, have been doing this job for many years. “ 

“The commission will have board inquiry powers which to date have only been enacted in Ontario. This is curious as the Federal Human Rights Commission has no inquiry power.”

He then continued; “In addition, the commission has the power to intervene in any complaints in any court. I wonder if it is the intent of this government to try to use the commission’s authority to engage in cases in other provinces or even other countries regarding human rights.” 

The answers to these things remain unknown at this point, so let’s get back to the what, when, where, why, and how the Human Rights Commission(er) is different from the Human Rights Code – or is this to be a position WITHIN, or PART OF, the Human Rights Code?

I ask this because apparently the legislative amendments to the Human Rights Code, re-establishing a BC Human Rights Commission, is primarily to promote and protect human rights. (you may wish to refer back to my initial description of the Code).  As to the governments viewpoint on the importance of having a Human Rights Commission?

Attorney General David Eby (R), with NDP MLA
Ravi Kahlon who led public consultation meetings
on re-establishing a new Human Rights Commission

“As we see what’s happening around the globe, it has never been more important that governments do all they can to end discrimination and stand up for human rights,” said Attorney General David Eby, before continuing:

“Every person deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. By re-establishing a human rights commission, we are creating a more inclusive and just society for all British Columbians.”

Officially, the media release from the Attorney Generals Office last week indicated that that the bill is designed to create an independent Human Rights Commissioner who will educate us on human rights … have the mandate to develop educational tools, policies and guidelines to promote human rights and combat widespread patterns of inequality and discrimination in society.

That still sounds an awful lot like a combination of the what the Human Rights Code, and Human Rights Tribunal are already doing.  I asked for clarification on the role, and was told that … there is no independent body that is focused solely on promoting and protecting human rights, with a key focus on education. 

BC’s human rights system has been primarily complaint driven, with limited emphasis or resources devoted to education and prevention work, I was told. 

“Human rights are fundamental to a civil open society. Those rights have been defended and supported for many years”, said John Rustad, MLA for Nechako Lake.  He has some concerns however.

“Bill 50 goes further but I’m concerned about unintended consequences from the powers and scope that has been provided”.  He then continued, “I will support this bill. I have questions. But I also want to make sure that everyone’s rights are recognized and protected.” 

I asked an individual, with many years in the trial courts including human rights and civil liberties, what they thought, and received this response: 

“The re-establishment of a provincial human rights commission was long overdue. It is ever important our governments do all they can to stand up for human rights, particularly with the rise of intolerance and prejudice.”

“Educating the public and preventing discrimination not only avoids harmful acts, it also has potential of reducing adversarial and costly legal disputes.”

This individual also indicated to me, something which I believe will be key … “The Commissioner will be independent of government, which avoids political interference.”

When I asked the AG Ministry about this point I was informed that:

The Commissioner will be proactive and will be there to tackle systemic discrimination issues head on, by providing education to British Columbians about human rights in order to reduce and eliminate discrimination in society.  The Commissioner’s mandate will be to promote and strengthen a human rights culture in BC.

And as to the Tribunal, a spokesperson replied that the role of the Human Rights Tribunal will continue to provide … adjudication and mediation if an individual’s rights have already been violated.  The jurisdiction of the HRT is related to individual or group discrimination complaints related to attributes such as race, religion, physical or mental disability etc. under the Human Rights Code. The HRT reacts to provide a remedy after the fact.

In 2002 when the Human Rights Commission was dismantled, one of the reasons given was that it was little more than a duplication of services. As then Attorney-General Geoff Plant said … there are too many delays and duplications under the current system.

"It is complicated, inefficient and slow. It can take years for a case to be heard, and justice delayed is justice denied".

Then there were what many called the trivial decisions.  What you ask, were they?  At the time Globe and Mail columnist Paul Sullivan stated:
“Under Ms. Sims, the commission went to ridiculous lengths to protect human rights, real or imagined, and, through this column, I sang in the chorus of ridicule.

In the same commentary however, Sullivan also quantified that with the following:
“ … in trying to stem the tide of NDP-inspired folly, the BC Liberals have resorted to the blunt instrument, heedless of the consequences.”

I was reminded by BC politico John Twigg, that BC’s original Human Rights Commission was brought in by then BC NDP Premier Dave Barrett, as part of a number of social policy initiatives in 1973.  It was killed by Bill Bennett’s Social Credit Party, but re-instated again by the NDP following Bennett’s defeat – and then as mentioned, cancelled in 2002 by the BC Liberals.

Will BC’s new Human Rights Commission indeed be little more than a duplication of services as some have said?  Only time will tell, but while we wait to find out, it could become an expensive question.

In Kamloops, I'm Alan Forseth.  If you have a thought on this commentary, I hope you will share it directly below in the Comments Section of the blog. 


NOTE:

To view the video of David Eby's announcement, of the new Human Rights Commission, CLICK HERE