Mike Ward decision closes human rights cases
The decision of the Supreme Court in favour of Mike Ward last June meant the Quebec human rights commission had to close nearly 200 cases, establishing that charter protection against discrimination does not guarantee a right not to be offended. TVA explains it a little differently: that an insult isn’t actionable in and of itself, but its effects have to be demonstrated beyond personal offence.
The commission chair says that three quarters of the closed cases involved racial slurs.
H. John 19:37 on 2022-12-03 Permalink
I was disturbed, if not surprised, when I read Commission Chair Philippe-André Tessier’s comments in the article:
“such comments remain totally unacceptable, even though we can no longer legally investigate many of these cases…” and “These cases, previously, could be investigated by the Commission and ultimately by the Tribunal..”
He suggests that the Ward case ended a “recourse” that Quebecer’s used to have. That is genuinely dishonest. What the Ward case ended was the Human Rights Commission acting outside the law. The National assembly never created such a recourse. The Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms was never created to judge racial slurs, or any other speech unless the effects are discriminatory.
As the Supreme Court wrote in the Ward case:
“[4] It is important to begin by noting that this question draws attention to a trend by the Commission and the Tribunal, in their decisions, to interpret their home statute, the Quebec Charter, as giving them jurisdiction over cases involving allegedly “discriminatory” comments made by individuals, either in private or in public. With respect, we are of the view that this trend deviates from this Court’s jurisprudence and reflects a misinterpretation of the provisions at issue in this case…
[5] It must be recognized at the outset that the Quebec Charter, which elevates freedom of expression to a fundamental freedom, was not enacted to encourage censorship. It follows that expression in the nature of rude remarks made by individuals does not in itself constitute discrimination under that statute. But this does not mean that the Quebec Charter can never apply to expression of this kind in very specific circumstances.”
The Commission never had the right to accept or decide this type of case. They unilaterally ignored the legislation, and gave themselves the right to judge what was or was not acceptable speech.
Kate 20:42 on 2022-12-03 Permalink
Thank you, H. John. I thought that was what was happening but you’ve made it very clear.