November 06, 2015

Time to abolish Ontario Human Rights Commission "protection racket"

Mindy AlterRebel Blogger

Were the Ontario "human rights" apparatus to disappear tomorrow, I highly doubt that any regular (that is, any non-victimhood-minded) Ontarian would miss it.

However, there are still plenty of people in this province who embrace the victim group shtick, including, of course, the new head of the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Her name is Renu Mandhane.

Here she is trying -- and, I would suggest, failing miserably -- to make a case for the continued existence of her useless, intrusive outfit. In so doing, she reveals something about the OHRC that should give Ontarians pause and make them warier than ever of the OHRC's creepy mission--and its relentless mission creep (the bolds are mine):

The OHRC was created in 1961 and was the first human rights body in Canada. To put this in perspective, the Commission was “born” the same year as Amnesty International, and precedes the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982). In the more than 50 years since its inception, the OHRC has played a central role in defining the type of society we want to live in--one that values and respects diversity.

The human rights landscape has changed dramatically since 1961. There are now parallel human rights institutions federally and in every province and territory, and numerous international human rights treaties to which Canada is a party. We have also seen the proliferation and professionalization of countless domestic and international human rights NGOs that monitor and advocate for vulnerable and marginalized groups. There are more groups protected against discrimination than ever before, and the language of “rights” permeates every facet of our lives.

In 2008, Ontario changed its human rights system to allow aggrieved individuals to directly access the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. The OHRC’s role was refocused to address persistent, systemic discrimination. These changes did not end critiques of the system.  Some argue that the OHRC has not done enough to further its important mandate.  Others believe that Canada is part of a “post-discrimination” world and that human rights commissions have outlived their usefulness. And those are the people who care. In Ontario, most people are ambivalent or simply don’t know about the OHRC, its role, and its work.

This is ironic because some of the issues that have captivated Ontarians in recent years clearly fall within the OHRC’s jurisdiction and are issues on which the Commission has been actively engaged. The persistence of workplace sexual harassment was brought to the forefront through the Jian Ghomeshi allegations, the accommodation of religious minorities was highlighted in the divisive niqab debate, Desmond Cole’s powerful personal reflection on carding brought into focus the racialized policing of young men across this country, Indigenous women face disproportionate levels of violence and await a national inquiry, and people with mental health issues continue to be over-criminalized and subject to solitary confinement in our jails. 

The role of the OHRC is to engage with these and many other difficult discrimination-related issues and provide guidance on what Ontario’s Human Rights Code requires government, employers, landlords, and service providers to do.  The Commission approaches these tasks in a way that is principled, strategic, impactful, and collaborative. This may require the OHRC to work behind the scenes to persuade the powers that be, but it also requires us to step into the fray and exercise bold leadership.

"Persuade the powers that be" to do -- what?

And why would we want these unelected officials, these sanctimonious bureaucrats, to "work behind the scenes," where we can't see them, don't know what they're doing, and therefore cannot hold them in any way accountable for their "bold" acts of "persuasion"?

Without meaning to, this latest incarnation of super-bossy Barbara Hall (who will always be remembered for her drive-by conviction of Mark Steyn and his "Islamophobic" writings) has provided an excellent reason to get rid of her un-transparent racket once and for all.


READ Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights --
Ezra Levant’s book about the Canadian Human Rights Commissions, censorship and the Mohammed cartoons was voted "the best political book of the last 25 years."

JOIN FREE for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

Toronto bureaucrats have banned a Christian group from singing hymns!
SIGN THE PETITION to fight anti-Christian bigotry at Yonge & Dundas Square:

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-11-16 21:04:03 -0500
Barbara Hall should have been put out with the garbage long ago. The fact that she still holds office, of any kind, is a testament to Liberal insanity!
commented 2015-11-13 22:02:26 -0500
Not only should they be abolished but all the unjustly penalized past victims of these hippety hoppety kangaroo courts should be fully compensated for their costs and suffering.
commented 2015-11-11 11:11:37 -0500
The fact that the Supreme Court allows these kangaroo courts to even exist is a good argument for limiting the powers of the Supreme Court or even abolishing it altogether.
commented 2015-11-10 01:57:25 -0500
But if they abolish them where all the crybaby Muslims and all the cry baby victims who are theives and cowards to go to extort others money . This human rights tribunal are a joke , nothing but a bunch of hacks on a free ride on your dime .
commented 2015-11-09 18:33:31 -0500
I could never understand how leftists support the kangaroo courts, other than the fact they are great training grounds for liberal lawyers. Lawyers will proudly include their time at the Commissions on their resumes. So much for the legal profession caring about our traditions of freedoms from Magna Carta to today. No, they will never take a case where a Muslim advocates, in print (editorials), on a soap box in Toronto, or on the internet, murder and hate. They will never take a case from a Christian or Catholic. These organizations work outside the legal process and don’t even provide the right to legal representation. They assume guilt from the beginning. The BC tribunal tried itself on Mark Steyn and Macleans and then backed down, which proves if you are poor and opinionated, their sites are on YOU.
commented 2015-11-09 12:25:54 -0500
This is a simple case of superfluous drone bureaucrats attempting to appear relevant – building bureaucratic fortresses, making political alignments to secure lush sinecure and creating “windmills to tilt at” (jousting with imaginary monsters). Without the creation of imaginary “injustice” the pickings are pretty lean for justice industry parasites in a civilized nation.

Perhaps she should go where the work is – like Syria, or Saudi where women are stoned for being raped – work on that injustice before you call putting materialist band aids on bruised egos “human rights justice”.
commented 2015-11-07 16:24:01 -0500
I’m curious what would happen if somehow one were ‘brought before’ this kangaroo court for ‘saying’ something, and in the so-called court room, made a statement about refusing to recognize the validity of the so-called court and the so-called judge.
Would some ‘court officer’ try and ‘take you into custody’ in the so-called court room before you walked out, do they have side arms?
Could the so-called court or so-called judge issue a bench warrant, or would the real police come for you at four am or something?
If you had no assets would bottom feeding scum like Richard Warman still come after you?

From: ‘How to stamp out cultural Marxism in a single generation.’
“…Demand that society respect your inherent individual rights:
Collectivism’s ultimate propaganda message is that there is no such thing as inherent rights or liberties and that all rights are arbitrary and subject to the whims of the group or the state. This is false. I have written extensively in the past on inherent rights, inborn psychological contents and natural law, referencing diverse luminaries, scientists and thinkers, including Thomas Aquinas, Carl Gustave Jung, Steven Pinker, etc. Freedom is an inborn conception with universally understood aspects. Period. No group or collective is more important than individual liberty. No artificial society has preeminence over the individuals within that society. As long as a person is not directly impeding the life, liberty, prosperity and privacy of another person, he should be left alone…”
commented 2015-11-07 13:12:09 -0500
Ezra, thank you, for uncovering these truth for us. This woman has got to go! Ontario Human Right Commission is a fraud!
commented 2015-11-07 12:43:17 -0500
No matter how you say it this is trouble for people who want honest Justice – not just Justice for the few and yes the Harper Government should have had the foresight to see this trouble coming and prevented a catastrophe! The point is what do we do now to go around it and at some point steer these policies right into the trash bin where they belong?
commented 2015-11-06 23:04:35 -0500
Ordinary working folks never stand a chance in this kangaroo court – and anyone who is offended wins hands down – unless a white skinned tax payer – then you are screwed
commented 2015-11-06 20:30:25 -0500
You mean the SHRC , SPECIAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION , since only special groups get rights under them.