Tag Archives: Human Rights Tribunal

Commentary

Saskatchewan planning to abolish its Human Rights Tribunal

3 Comments
Political Map of Canada

Wow. I am speechless over this good news.

The Saskatchewan Leader-Post reports on the conservative Saskatchewan Party’s plan to introduce a bill to abolish the Human Rights Tribunal and replace it with non-kangaroo courts. (H/T Small Dead Animals via ECM)

Excerpt:

The provincial government plans to introduce human rights legislation that will dissolve the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal in favour of having a court hear the complaints.

Justice Minister Don Morgan said the change, among other reforms to the Human Rights Code, is being undertaken at the suggestion of Judge David Arnot, chief commissioner of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission. The commission is the body that receives human rights complaints and occasionally refers a matter to a tribunal for a hearing.

“There seemed to be a lot of support for going forward with it so we felt it was an appropriate piece of legislation to bring at this time,” said Morgan, whose Sask. Party government signalled its intent in the throne speech to move forward with changes, which were first discussed in the spring.

“It will allow for a more streamlined process, more mediation and more expedited handling of files. But the most significant thing is it will no longer be the human rights tribunal. The complaints, when they’re referred on, will go directly to the Court of Queen’s Bench,” Morgan said.

The only problem with Saskatchewan now is that it’s really cold there, and Kate McMillan’s beloved Roughriders aren’t doing too well right now.

UPDATE: Here is a quick introduction to the Human Rights Commissions and Human Rights Tribunals.

That’s Ezra Levant, a Jewish conservative who is the King of free speech in Canada.

Related posts

News

Australia considers bill to criminalize free speech by Christians

2 Comments

From the Australian. (H/T Thoughts Out Loud)

Excerpt:

Australians who wear a crucifix to work or offer to pray for a patient in hospital could run foul of a charter of rights, according to a British legal expert who says its introduction in this country would trigger an attack on religious expression.

Barrister Paul Diamond said equivalent laws in Britain had intensified religious resentment and introduced a degree of uncertainty into the rule of law.

He cited the example of a workplace dispute at British Airways in which the company had tried to prevent an employee from wearing a crucifix while permitting other workers to carry Sikh ceremonial knives and wear turbans and Muslim head scarfs.

Mr Diamond said the secular ideology of the British Human Rights Act was being used to politicise the judiciary and eradicate “unacceptable religious viewpoints on same-sex, on women, on a whole range of moral issues”.

[…]He said one of his most frightening cases concerned a man known as David Booker who was threatened with dismissal for telling a co-worker that Christians opposed pre-marital sex and same-sex relations.

“She had asked him about his Christian faith. She complained and he was suspended and would have been sacked had we not intervened. It was a private sector employer interpreting their diversity policy to eliminate offensive Christian viewpoints from the culture.”

Here are some stories from the UK:

Canada has similar infringements on religious expression because of the anti-Christian Canadian Human Rights Act.

And bad things are already happening the United States.

My recommendation? Don’t vote for Democrats like Obama.

News

Obama administration backs restrictions on free speech at the United Nations

1 Comment

Story from the Weekly Standard. (H/T Confederate Yankee via ECM)

Excerpt:

The Obama administration has marked its first foray into the UN human rights establishment by backing calls for limits on freedom of expression. The newly-minted American policy was rolled out at the latest session of the UN Human Rights Council, which ended in Geneva on Friday.

[…]In introducing the resolution on Thursday, October 1–adopted by consensus the following day–the ranking U.S. diplomat, Chargé d’Affaires Douglas Griffiths, crowed:

“The United States is very pleased to present this joint project with Egypt. This initiative is a manifestation of the Obama administration’s commitment to multilateral engagement throughout the United Nations and of our genuine desire to seek and build cooperation based upon mutual interest and mutual respect in pursuit of our shared common principles of tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

His Egyptian counterpart, Ambassador Hisham Badr, was equally pleased–for all the wrong reasons. He praised the development by telling the Council that “freedom of expression . . . has been sometimes misused,” insisting on limits consistent with the “true nature of this right” and demanding that the “the media must . . . conduct . . . itself in a professional and ethical manner.”

[…]Pakistan’s Ambassador Zamir Akram, speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, made it clear that they understand the resolution and its protection against religious stereotyping as allowing free speech to be trumped by anything that defames or negatively stereotypes religion. The idea of protecting the human rights “of religions” instead of individuals is a favorite of those countries that do not protect free speech and which use religion–as defined by government–to curtail it.

Speaking as a Christian who values religious liberty, I would not use the power of the state to silence the free speech of people who “offend” me by disagreeing with me. That’s fine with me. In any case, these “human rights” laws are almost never used to defend the free speech of Christians. The fact that Egypt and Pakistan approve of Obama’s plan doesn’t fill me with confidence about who is likely to benefit.

Now might be a good time to review how restrictions on free speech worked out in Canada, where offended Muslims sue news publications and news magazines for citing the actual words of radical Imams or publishing the Mohammed cartoons.

Share