Law firm JSMK Law counsel James Kitchen criticized the Alberta Human Rights Commission (AHRC) for long waits to hear human rights complaints about mask and vaccine exemptions. .“My clients are concerned at the inordinate delay in receiving decisions from the director as to whether their complaints will be summarily dismissed, or referred to a hearing before a tribunal,” said Kitchen in a Friday letter to AHRC Chief Evaristus Oshionebo. .“However, my clients all — reasonably so—harbour a further, even more serious concern: That the delay on the part of the director in issuing Sec. 21 decisions may be deliberate.” .Sec. 21 of the Alberta Human Rights Act (AHRA) allows the director to summarily dismiss complaints or refer them to Oshionebo for resolution by a human rights tribunal. The director summarily dismissed a large number of human rights complaints about masks and COVID-19 vaccines through Sec. 21. .Consistent with a pattern emerging from these type of complaints, the letter said the director has informed each of Kitchen’s clients its office would issue a decision about their filings and invite submissions from them. It said four out of the five complaints he's involved with saw this action taken prior to any conciliation. .No Sec. 21 decisions have been issued by the director about these five complaints. One of his clients has been waiting since 2021 for a response. .Expert reports have been filed for four of these five complaints. The expert reports support his clients allegations of discrimination about them being unable to wear masks or receive COVID-19 vaccines. .The letter said his clients are questioning why the director is not issuing decisions while dismissing similar complaints from people who have not filed expert evidence or have a lawyer. .Kitchen said he is unaware of any other mask or vaccine complaints before the AHRC where applicants have expert evidence or a lawyer. He said having expert testimony and a lawyer “render my clients’ complaints ideal cases for which the Director should quickly issue Sec. 21 decisions so they may either proceed to a tribunal hearing or the decisions to dismiss, if any, may be appealed.” .The letter went on to say the AHRA is failing in its mission to promote equality if it does not uphold rights for people who cannot wear masks or take vaccines because of disabilities or religious beliefs. It added accommodating his clients does not place undue hardship onto anyone. .By failing or refusing to issue decisions about the five complaints, Kitchen said the director is “contributing to the systemic discrimination of my clients and those similarly situated.” He requested Oshionebo respond to the lawsuits within 30 to 60 days for his clients. .“Should the director fail or refuse to issue Sec. 21 decisions within the timeline identified above, my clients will be compelled to consider further action, up to and including filing applications with the Court of King’s Bench for mandamus relief to compel the director to do so,” he said. .Kitchen was involved with Liberty Coalition Canada (LCC) initiating a legal challenge against Western University on Oct. 6 on behalf of some students denied exemptions from its booster policy. .READ MORE: Civil liberties group files lawsuit against Western for booster mandate.“Some of these denials involve students who have not received any of the shots, consistent with their sincere Christian beliefs, while some involve students coerced into receiving the first two doses of the COVID vaccines last year, but refuse to violate their consciences further by receiving any more shots,” said LCC. .Kitchen secured a reversal of one of the religious exemption denials after issuing a demand letter to Western. After he issued two more demand letters to Western on behalf of other Christian students, the university hired law firm Hicks Morley.
Law firm JSMK Law counsel James Kitchen criticized the Alberta Human Rights Commission (AHRC) for long waits to hear human rights complaints about mask and vaccine exemptions. .“My clients are concerned at the inordinate delay in receiving decisions from the director as to whether their complaints will be summarily dismissed, or referred to a hearing before a tribunal,” said Kitchen in a Friday letter to AHRC Chief Evaristus Oshionebo. .“However, my clients all — reasonably so—harbour a further, even more serious concern: That the delay on the part of the director in issuing Sec. 21 decisions may be deliberate.” .Sec. 21 of the Alberta Human Rights Act (AHRA) allows the director to summarily dismiss complaints or refer them to Oshionebo for resolution by a human rights tribunal. The director summarily dismissed a large number of human rights complaints about masks and COVID-19 vaccines through Sec. 21. .Consistent with a pattern emerging from these type of complaints, the letter said the director has informed each of Kitchen’s clients its office would issue a decision about their filings and invite submissions from them. It said four out of the five complaints he's involved with saw this action taken prior to any conciliation. .No Sec. 21 decisions have been issued by the director about these five complaints. One of his clients has been waiting since 2021 for a response. .Expert reports have been filed for four of these five complaints. The expert reports support his clients allegations of discrimination about them being unable to wear masks or receive COVID-19 vaccines. .The letter said his clients are questioning why the director is not issuing decisions while dismissing similar complaints from people who have not filed expert evidence or have a lawyer. .Kitchen said he is unaware of any other mask or vaccine complaints before the AHRC where applicants have expert evidence or a lawyer. He said having expert testimony and a lawyer “render my clients’ complaints ideal cases for which the Director should quickly issue Sec. 21 decisions so they may either proceed to a tribunal hearing or the decisions to dismiss, if any, may be appealed.” .The letter went on to say the AHRA is failing in its mission to promote equality if it does not uphold rights for people who cannot wear masks or take vaccines because of disabilities or religious beliefs. It added accommodating his clients does not place undue hardship onto anyone. .By failing or refusing to issue decisions about the five complaints, Kitchen said the director is “contributing to the systemic discrimination of my clients and those similarly situated.” He requested Oshionebo respond to the lawsuits within 30 to 60 days for his clients. .“Should the director fail or refuse to issue Sec. 21 decisions within the timeline identified above, my clients will be compelled to consider further action, up to and including filing applications with the Court of King’s Bench for mandamus relief to compel the director to do so,” he said. .Kitchen was involved with Liberty Coalition Canada (LCC) initiating a legal challenge against Western University on Oct. 6 on behalf of some students denied exemptions from its booster policy. .READ MORE: Civil liberties group files lawsuit against Western for booster mandate.“Some of these denials involve students who have not received any of the shots, consistent with their sincere Christian beliefs, while some involve students coerced into receiving the first two doses of the COVID vaccines last year, but refuse to violate their consciences further by receiving any more shots,” said LCC. .Kitchen secured a reversal of one of the religious exemption denials after issuing a demand letter to Western. After he issued two more demand letters to Western on behalf of other Christian students, the university hired law firm Hicks Morley.
