JSMK Law counsel James Kitchen has asked the Alberta Human Rights Commission (AHRC) stop stalling with human rights complaints he is involved with about mask and vaccine mandates. .“My clients now wonder if their complaints are simply being ignored and/or whether the Director is simply refusing to issue Section 21 decisions regarding their complaints,” said Kitchen in a letter to the Office of the Director. .All five complainants have been told their complaints likely lack merit and the director will make a decision pursuant to Section 21 of the Alberta Human Rights Act as to whether or not each of the complaints will be summarily dismissed. But the letter said all of Kitchen’s clients’ complaints have a reasonable prospect of success because of the facts alleged and evidence adduced. .It went on to say the complaints should not have to be referred to the Office of the Director for a Section 21 decision. The clients’ greater concern is over the director refusing to issue these decisions. .Kitchen wrote to AHRC Chief Evaristus Oshionebo to complain about the long waits to hear human rights complaints about mask and vaccine exemptions in October. .READ MORE: Alberta lawyer condemns human rights commission wait times for mask, vaccine complaints.“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,” he said. .“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.” .Kitchen received a same-day reply from senior counsel to the chief and a letter in November from AHRC Director Vaughn Neff. Neither letter was responsive to his clients’ concerns and did not provide any estimate as to when they could expect to receive Section 21 decisions. .Neff’s letter contained inaccurate information about the status of his clients’ complaints. For example, contrary to his assertion, all required information concerning one complaint had been acknowledged as accepted by human rights officer Jamie Springchief in November. .Two complaints have been waiting for a decision from the Office of the Director for more than one year after complaints registrar Charmaine Rhoden completed the review referred to by Neff. Contrary to Neff’s statement his clients’ complaints originate from 2022, these two were submitted to the AHRC in 2021. .Kitchen called the delay with these complaints “simply inexcusable and raises a reasonable apprehension of institutional bias towards complainants who are unable to wear a mask or receive the COVID-19 vaccines due to a protected characteristic such as religious beliefs or disability.” .He said invoking Section 21 is an exceptional discretionary decision. He added it is “an abuse of process to, instead, use the invocation of Section 21 of the Act as a means to shunt politically inconvenient complaints to the side in the hope the complaints will be abandoned or to be dealt with only after enough similar but weaker complaints have been summarily dismissed.” .The letter concluded by saying Kitchen hopes this is not the case, and it would be grave if it was. After waiting another five months since raising their concerns about delay and no decisions being issued about any of the five, it said it is becoming increasingly difficult to accept the AHRC is acting in good faith. .“My clients deserve no less than all other Albertans to have their human rights complaints addressed in good faith and timely manner,” he said. .“I implore the Office of the Director to issue Section 21 decisions regarding my clients’ pursuant to the Office’s obligation to render such decisions in a timely fashion so that my clients can either appeal the dismissal of their complaint or proceed to a tribunal hearing.”.The AHRC could not be reached for comment in time for publication.
JSMK Law counsel James Kitchen has asked the Alberta Human Rights Commission (AHRC) stop stalling with human rights complaints he is involved with about mask and vaccine mandates. .“My clients now wonder if their complaints are simply being ignored and/or whether the Director is simply refusing to issue Section 21 decisions regarding their complaints,” said Kitchen in a letter to the Office of the Director. .All five complainants have been told their complaints likely lack merit and the director will make a decision pursuant to Section 21 of the Alberta Human Rights Act as to whether or not each of the complaints will be summarily dismissed. But the letter said all of Kitchen’s clients’ complaints have a reasonable prospect of success because of the facts alleged and evidence adduced. .It went on to say the complaints should not have to be referred to the Office of the Director for a Section 21 decision. The clients’ greater concern is over the director refusing to issue these decisions. .Kitchen wrote to AHRC Chief Evaristus Oshionebo to complain about the long waits to hear human rights complaints about mask and vaccine exemptions in October. .READ MORE: Alberta lawyer condemns human rights commission wait times for mask, vaccine complaints.“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,” he said. .“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.” .Kitchen received a same-day reply from senior counsel to the chief and a letter in November from AHRC Director Vaughn Neff. Neither letter was responsive to his clients’ concerns and did not provide any estimate as to when they could expect to receive Section 21 decisions. .Neff’s letter contained inaccurate information about the status of his clients’ complaints. For example, contrary to his assertion, all required information concerning one complaint had been acknowledged as accepted by human rights officer Jamie Springchief in November. .Two complaints have been waiting for a decision from the Office of the Director for more than one year after complaints registrar Charmaine Rhoden completed the review referred to by Neff. Contrary to Neff’s statement his clients’ complaints originate from 2022, these two were submitted to the AHRC in 2021. .Kitchen called the delay with these complaints “simply inexcusable and raises a reasonable apprehension of institutional bias towards complainants who are unable to wear a mask or receive the COVID-19 vaccines due to a protected characteristic such as religious beliefs or disability.” .He said invoking Section 21 is an exceptional discretionary decision. He added it is “an abuse of process to, instead, use the invocation of Section 21 of the Act as a means to shunt politically inconvenient complaints to the side in the hope the complaints will be abandoned or to be dealt with only after enough similar but weaker complaints have been summarily dismissed.” .The letter concluded by saying Kitchen hopes this is not the case, and it would be grave if it was. After waiting another five months since raising their concerns about delay and no decisions being issued about any of the five, it said it is becoming increasingly difficult to accept the AHRC is acting in good faith. .“My clients deserve no less than all other Albertans to have their human rights complaints addressed in good faith and timely manner,” he said. .“I implore the Office of the Director to issue Section 21 decisions regarding my clients’ pursuant to the Office’s obligation to render such decisions in a timely fashion so that my clients can either appeal the dismissal of their complaint or proceed to a tribunal hearing.”.The AHRC could not be reached for comment in time for publication.
