The Ontario Human Rights Commission has decided
not to proceed with complaints filed against Maclean’s magazine related to its
publication of an article “The future belongs to Islam.” The complainants
alleged that the content of the article and Maclean’s refusal to provide space
for a rebuttal violated their human rights. The decision means that the
complaints will not be referred to a hearing before the Human Rights Tribunal
of Ontario.
Denying a service because of race or creed can form the basis for a human
rights complaint. However, the Ontario Human Rights Code does not give the
Commission the jurisdiction to deal with the content of magazine articles
through its complaint process. cnw
The barristers in short pants knew the Ontario decision was coming but it is interesting to note that even the
OHRC is clued into its jurisdictional limitations. This is not the case with the
CHRC or the
BCHRT.
April 10th, 2008 at 1:40 am
The OHRC dives for cover, but, it is very telling that #1 they accepted the complaint and #2 did not reject it the next day.
These people had intention to persecute Macleans and Steyn. And that my friends, is what is so dangerous.
April 10th, 2008 at 2:47 am
The OHRC ruling said: “While freedom of expression must be recognized as a cornerstone of a functioning democracy, the Commission strongly condemns the Islamophobic portrayal of Muslims, Arabs, South Asians and indeed any racialized community in the media, such as the Maclean’s article and others like them, as being inconsistent with the values enshrined in our human rights codes.”
So, in other words ‘we haven’t got the guts nor case to take you on but let us remind you anyway Steyn and Macleans that you are bigots’. LOL! Leftardness sure sticks in all matters and above all else, does it not?
April 10th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
“While freedom of expression must be recognized as a cornerstone of a functioning democracy, the Commission strongly condemns the Islamophobic portrayal of Muslims, Arabs, South Asians and indeed any racialized community in the media, such as the Maclean’s article and others like them, as being inconsistent with the values enshrined in our human rights codes. Media has a responsibility to engage in fair and unbiased journalism.”
I think you are being rather generous in your comments, Jay. OHRC says it has no jurisdiction but they condemn Macleans anyways. I think this is worse than if they would have went ahead with the hearing. Macleans does not get to present its side of the case while being condemned as being Islamophobic. Why bother with trials or hearings when you can just jump straight to the condemnation part.
April 10th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
And I like the new word she invented, “Islamaphobia” as if Islam is some sort of constituency.
Islam is a way of life and not a person at all, so objecting to it is as fair a comment as you get.
As to the multiple complaints on the same issue shows that this attack on freedom was planned and has completely back-fired on Dr. Elmasry and his law student adherents to the complaint.
Commissioner Hall’s racial remarks and gross political posturing shows why these commissions need to be curtailed at all levels of government for their trampling of freedom of expression and speech.
April 11th, 2008 at 2:17 am
“the Commission strongly condemns the Islamophobic portrayal of Muslims, Arabs, South Asians and indeed any racialized community in the media, such as the Maclean’s article and others like them, as being inconsistent with the values enshrined in our human rights codes.”
That statement is defamatory of Steyn and Macleans. Maybe Mark Steyn should serve a Libel and Slander Act notice on them and demand an apology.