Down With Everybody

NY Sun:

Three European countries are mounting a campaign for two available seats on the U.N. Human Rights Council, even as the prestige of the Geneva-based body reaches a new low.

France, Britain, and Spain are lobbying the 192 U.N. member states, seeking to gain support for their claim to two available slots among the seven that are reserved for Western countries on the 47-member council. America has declined to run for membership on the council, which in the two years since its inception has faulted only Israel for human rights violations.

…

Mr. Zimeray described the first Durban conference as a “laboratory of hatred” and said it would have become the most significant event in international “political life” had it not been immediately followed by the attacks of September 11, 2001. Durban II risks the same fate, he said, and he acknowledged that the Human Rights Council “is not perfect.”

Asked why France should lend its prestige to a body that he said has an “obsession” with Israel, Mr. Zimeray said that if Western countries withdrew from the Human Rights Council and established a separate rights panel, they would create a situation like that in ancient Greece, where democracy was reserved for Athenians only.

The rest.

And even more cheap talk from fearless “human rights investigators.”

Keep investigating and polishing those powder blues. Then sit on your ass like always and do nothing. Congratulations! You just won a pay check for watching people get executed and using strong language against the executioner. How was your flight?

Six UN special human rights investigators have issued a joint statement condemning the worsening rights situation in Zimbabwe.  The experts investigate extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; violence against women; adequate housing; freedom of opinion and expression; human rights defenders and the question of torture.

…

The High Commissioner and the special UN investigators are urging the authorities of Zimbabwe to put an end to organized and politically motivated violence.

The rest.

Another bureaucrat with cheap talk. This time it’s about food.

One day after taking up his new job as U.N. special reporter on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter likened the crisis to a “silent tsunami” affecting 100 million people.

“If we had 100 million persons arrested in a dictatorial regime, if we had 100 million persons beaten up by police, of course we’d be marching in the streets and we’d be convening special sessions,” De Schutter said at a news conference.

The rest.

Blencoe v. British Columbia (Human Rights Commission) [2000]

Supreme Court decision:

Following the allegations against the respondent, media attention was intense.  He suffered from severe depression.  He did not stand for re-election in 1996.  Considering himself “unemployable” in British Columbia due to the outstanding human rights complaints against him, the respondent commenced judicial review proceedings in November 1997 to have the complaints stayed.  He claimed that the Commission had lost jurisdiction due to unreasonable delay in processing the complaints.  The respondent alleged that the unreasonable delay caused serious prejudice to him and his family which amounted to an abuse of process and a denial of natural justice.  His petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court of British Columbia.  A majority of the Court of Appeal allowed the respondent’s appeal and directed that the human rights proceedings against him be stayed.  The majority found that the respondent had been deprived of his right under s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to security of the person in a manner which was not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

…

177   It is true that administrative delay was not the only cause of the prejudice suffered by the respondent.  Nevertheless, it contributed significantly to its aggravation.  It must be added, though, that this delay also frustrated the complainants in their desire for a quick disposition of their complaints.  Finally, the inefficient and delay-filled process at the Commission linked with the specific blunders made in the management of those particular complaints harmed all parties involved in this sorry process.  Its flaws were such that it may rightly be termed to have been abusive in respect of the respondent.  In this connection, I note that my colleague, Bastarache J., despite coming to the conclusion that the conduct of the Commission did not amount to an abuse of process, nevertheless found it necessary to award costs against the Commission in light of the “lack of diligence [it] displayed” (para. 136).  In my view, this further demonstrates the tension in this appeal and the fact that the conduct of the Commission in dealing with this matter was less than acceptable.

The rest.

Daley, appointed the new head of the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission yesterday, said she was drawn to immigration issues early in her legal career.

Daley, 47, a Dartmouth native, was chosen after a nearly two-year search by headhunting firm Staffing Strategists. She’ll make $131,000 a year and has been appointed for three years.

The rest.  

Arriving on the penultimate day of a global conference on indigenous issues, [Indian Affairs Minister] Strahl called a news conference to counter charges Canada was now hostile to efforts to address indigenous causes.

Key speakers among the 3,300 delegates have been blasting Ottawa over its refusal last September to back the UN’s Indigenous Rights declaration, which indigenous groups say provides a crucial framework for helping native peoples globally.

…

Successive Canadian governments took part in more than 20 years of talks aimed at producing the UN declaration, but the current government said it couldn’t support what emerged because it failed to reflect what it called the traditional Canadian balancing of rights of all peoples - native and non-native.

Plus, a direct threat:

“Whether you voted for it or not, it will apply to you - this is now part of international human rights law,” said Tauli-Corpuz.

The rest.

The U.K. government’s decision to ratify the European Union’s proposed controlling treaty without a referendum can be challenged by a British businessman, a U.K. court decided.

Former IG Group Plc Chairman John Stuart Wheeler, 73, won permission to have the decision judicially reviewed in a judgment today by the High Court in London. The legal dispute will be heard by the court on June 9 and 10.

The Lisbon Treaty, signed by 27 EU leaders in Lisbon in December, is designed to replace the European Constitution that was rejected by French and Dutch voters in referendums in 2005. The treaty also creates a full-time EU president.

…

From 57 percent to 83 percent of British voters would like the opportunity to vote on the treaty, according to YouGov Plc’s polling Web site. Six polls since the middle of last year also show that British voters would vote down the treaty.

The rest.

Do I hear a collective groan from M-446 supporters? Yes; getting rid of Section 13 won’t be much help if every Canadian province has a human rights code that contains wording similar to (b), which is virtually the same used in the key phrase in Section 13.(*) 

(The hearing schedule notes that the Section 7 complaint addresses “religion” as the specific area of discrimination in the Elmasry/Habib complaint.) 

This might partly explain the great confidence displayed by Canadian Islamic Congress lawyer Faisal Joseph at Wednesday’s press conference.

“If Maclean’s is ready to consider an opportunity for the Muslim population to have its say, we are ready for reasonable conciliation … One way or another it’s going to be dealt with, either by agreement or by an imposed decision.”

Joseph may not be bluffing. He may figure that even if his clients lose the Section 7 complaint in BC, there is a good chance that the CHRC tribunal will hear a version of the BC complaint under Section 13.

The rest.

…did you know the authority of your Common Law went out the window 10 years ago?

David Pannick, QC, a leading public law barrister, said: “Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to life and if authorities have been seriously negligent so as to create a real risk of loss of life or serious harm then legal proceedings can be brought against them.”

The long-standing immunity enjoyed by police in the UK was overturned by the European Court of Human Rights in a case called Osman in 1998. It was brought by Mulkiye Osman and her son Ahmet, who had been badly injured. His father, Ali, was killed in 1988 by a man about whom the family had warned police.

The court ruled that although in that case the police could not be criticised, if in future they failed to take appropriate measures to avoid risks, the State might be liable for that failure.

The rest.

Another day, another chance for the Council of Europe to tell a sovereign nation’s people how to run their lives. And the UK sits there and sucks on it. Embarrassing.

“The Committee of Ministers was informed by the United Kingdom that the legislation at issue is currently under review by the Government of Gibraltar.

“The United Kingdom reaffirmed its commitment on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues, and indicated that the Government of Gibraltar is aware of the importance of compliance with the Convention, notably the principle of non-discrimination.

“The Committee of Ministers welcomes the assurance that the United Kingdom takes very seriously its full international responsibility for Gibraltar, and therefore its responsibility for Gibraltar’s compliance with the Convention, and encourages the United Kingdom to resolve this matter in the near future.

“The Committee will keep the Parliamentary Assembly informed of developments on this matter.”

The rest.