The federal "human rights" commission has followed its Ontario counterpart and dismissed the complaint against Mclean's. That however doesn't let Mclean's and Mark Steyn off the hook, as the very same complaint is still being reviewed by the star chamber in BC. Neither does the CHRC decision address the actual problem which the "human rights" commissions have become in the past decade.
The problem is that technically - anyone who believes that his feelings have been hurt can file a complaint against just anyone. That's right - just anyone against anyone. With the way the freedom-snatching committees operate, the complainer doesn't have to be the direct victim. All he needs is to explain in writing why does he think someone's article or blog post or even a joke is "likely to expose" a member of a designated victim group to hatred and contempt - and he's got his complaint going.
Dismissing the complaint against Mclean's does nothing to address the flawed arbitration, employed by the HRC. The truth is not a defence in the star chambers. The right to a fair trial doesn't exist. The very same complaint could be filed in multiple jurisdictions at the same time - after all, the complainer gets all his legal expenses paid by the taxpayers. It's the respondent who must spend thousands if not tens of thousands to defend himself and his business...
Sure, I'm glad that the complaint against Mclean's was dismissed. But we shouldn't stop there. We need to make sure that motion M-446 is voted on and that section 13.1 is deleted from the "human rights" act. We need to have the commission mandate reviewed, so that kangaroo courts could be brought under control and reformed, if not abolished altogether.
No comments:
Post a Comment