Human rights under pressure – from policing to pandemics: Annual Report 2020–2021

Annual report cover
 

Human rights under pressure: from policing to pandemics, the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s (OHRC) 2020 – 2021 Annual Report, provides qualitative and quantitative information that tracks our progress in meeting the commitments set out in our 2017–22 Strategic Plan, Putting people and their rights at the centre. 

 

View PDF: Human rights under pressure–from policing to pandemics: Annual Report 2020–2021

 

We envision an inclusive society where everyone takes responsibility for promoting and protecting human rights; where everyone is valued and treated with equal dignity and respect; and where everyone’s human rights are a lived reality.

Our mission is to promote and enforce human rights, to engage in relationships that embody the principles of dignity and respect, and to create a culture of human rights compliance and accountability.

 


Contents

 


June 23, 2021

Hon. Ted Arnott
Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario
Room 180, Main Legislative Building
Queen’s Park
Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A2

Dear Mr. Speaker:

Under Section 31.6 (2) of the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) is required to submit a report on its activities for the previous fiscal period by June 30 of each year, to be tabled in the Legislature.

In this regard, I am pleased to provide you with Human rights under pressure: from policing to pandemics, the OHRC’s annual report of its activities from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021.

Sincerely,

Ena Chadha
Chief Commissioner
Ontario Human Rights Commission

ISBN/ISSN: 
ISSN: 0702-0358
Administrative: 
Resource Type: 

Top outcomes, OHRC by the numbers 2020–21

Top outcomes 

  • The OHRC released A Disparate Impact, the second interim report on its inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, which confirmed that Black people were more likely than others to be arrested, charged, over-charged, struck, shot or killed by Toronto police.
  • The OHRC released a Policy statement on a human rights-based approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic, guiding governments on putting human rights at the centre of their policy, legal, regulatory, public health and emergency-related responses. The OHRC also frequently updated its series of online questions and answers explaining human rights and obligations during the pandemic.
  • Ontario’s Vaccine Distribution Task Force said the OHRC’s COVID-19 policy helped inform the province’s ethical framework for vaccine distribution, which explicitly reflects the importance of human rights protections and non-discrimination. The government also agreed to collect socio-demographic human rights data on testing for COVID-19, and invited the OHRC to serve on the COVID-19 socio-demographic data consultation group.
  • Peel Regional Police, its board and the OHRC signed a Memorandum of Understanding, committing to develop and implement legally binding remedies to identify and eliminate systemic racism in policing in Peel Region.
  • After the OHRC intervened in Francis v Ontario, the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed that segregating prisoners more than 15 days in a row is cruel and unconstitutional, and for people with serious mental illness, any segregation is unconstitutional. The Court considered the OHRC’s work to obtain and enforce the Jahn v Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services consent order.
  • The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ordered Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation to stop requiring refugees to obtain state authentication of their driving experience, relying on OHRC arguments and evidence in Al-Turki v Ontario (Transportation).
  • With coordination from the OHRC, Six Nations of the Grand River First Nation and the Ontario Lacrosse Association began a process for discussions to address concerns of anti-Indigenous racism in lacrosse.
  • The OHRC launched the newest version of its main online training program, Human Rights 101. This program features a fresh new look, expanded discussions on discrimination and the latest directions in human rights, and outlines rights and responsibilities under the Ontario Human Rights Code.
  • After the OHRC wrote to all public colleges and universities in Ontario about Indigenous, Black and racialized students experiencing discrimination and targeting on campus, 12 colleges and universities responded and outlined the steps they are taking to create and sustain equitable and inclusive education environments. The OHRC continues to receive more response letters.
  • The Minister of Education agreed to meet with the OHRC to discuss potential recommendations from the upcoming Right to Read Inquiry report on human rights issues affecting students with reading disabilities in Ontario’s public education system.

 


OHRC by the numbers

The OHRC’s efforts to address systemic discrimination have a profound effect on the lives of vulnerable people across Ontario.

 

The OHRC’s message

5,341,196

Unique views of the OHRC website

3,151,124

Impressions – number of people reached – on Twitter (2,470,431), YouTube (412,707), Facebook (239,994), Instagram (27,992)

424,069

Engagements (likes, shares, retweets, comments, reactions, views and clicks) on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube

35,513

OHRC social media followers and friends

 

OHRC public education and speaking events

6,135

People engaged in 62 virtual training sessions and virtual speaking events

 

OHRC online learning

654,307

People who accessed eLearning courses

528,426

People who accessed Working Together: The Code and the AODA

71,983

People who accessed Call it out: Racism, racial discrimination and human rights – a major increase over 2019–20

32,432

People who accessed Human Rights 101

 

Engaging with communities and government

120,035

Unique website views for COVID-19 questions and answers

5,401

Media stories referencing the OHRC, including 41 media interviews with the Chief Commissioner, Executive Director and OHRC subject matter experts

1,143

Media stories referencing A Disparate Impact, the OHRC’s second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service

474

Media stories referencing the OHRC’s work related to COVID-19, with a cumulative potential reach of 98,240,257 people

86%

School boards surveyed that use OHRC products to promote compliance with Ontario’s Human Rights Code in their work

75%

Education stakeholders surveyed who agree or somewhat agree that OHRC policies provide practical guidance

55%

Ontario police services surveyed that use OHRC products to promote compliance with Ontario’s Human Rights Code in their work

11

Opinion editorials by the Chief Commissioner, OHRC statements

A message from the Chief Commissioner

Human rights under pressure: from policing to pandemics

The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) just turned 60, and next year, we will celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Human Rights Code. Both the OHRC and the Code were the first of their kind in Canada. From the beginning, the Code enshrined the vision and the OHRC served as the leading voice for human rights.

This is a time to reflect on the past and the many people who have shaped the evolution and advancement of the OHRC and the Code. From the outset, as embodied by our first Chair, Louis Fine, and first Director, Dr. Daniel G. Hill, this advancement has depended on meaningful engagement with communities to better learn the challenges they experience, their expectations of how the OHRC can help promote equity, the places the Code could be strengthened, and how we could seize opportunities to champion human rights.

This focus on the lived experiences of communities has never been more important than this past year as Ontario and the world confronted two pandemics – COVID-19 and the sharp rise of anti-Black and systemic racism. Both crises have put the values of human rights under intense pressure and risk in our neighbourhoods, our schools, our health-care system, and everywhere else in our society.

As government and agencies began emergency planning based on the misplaced notion that the pandemic didn’t discriminate, the OHRC moved quickly to frame COVID-19 as a serious human rights issue and spotlight the potency of its discriminatory effects. Because we consistently heard how certain communities were being disproportionately disadvantaged, we understood that we had to be unyielding in our pressure to call out xenophobia and systemic discrimination that targets vulnerable groups across Ontario.

This annual report offers more detail and insight on our significant body of work, from the pandemic to policing. Along with pivoting to respond to COVID-19 issues, the OHRC continued to meet our existing commitments – to pursue systemic change in education and criminal justice, to promote Indigenous reconciliation and engagement, and to present poverty through a nuanced human rights framework.

When I was appointed Chief Commissioner in July 2020, I was met with a flurry of activity on COVID-19, as the OHRC issued policy statements and guidelines, wrote to and negotiated with many ministries and municipalities, consulted extensively with affected communities, and offered practical guidance to employers, service and housing providers. At the same time, as this annual report clearly shows, we are continuing to advance our priority commitments and advocate for equity in a multitude of new arenas, relying on disaggregated data and human rights principles.

For example, as I write this, we are in the final stages of completing two important public interest inquiries that we hope will inspire transformational, system-wide change in education and policing in Ontario. The first is our Right to Read inquiry into human rights issues that affect students with reading disabilities in Ontario’s public education system. The goal is to assess whether Ontario is using evidence-based approaches to fulfill the right to read, a crucial need for all students. The second is our ongoing inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination against Black people by the Toronto Police Service.

While the inquiries have faced delays and hurdles due to the pandemic, the OHRC team is undertaking a tremendous amount of work to release both reports in 2021–22. Both reports will outline our systemic findings, and include a series of recommendations to improve human rights in education and policing across the province.

The entire world faced a tumultuous year in 2020–21, with crises ranging from a pandemic to polarizing political change to pronounced awareness of anti-Black and anti-Asian racism and health disparities. Across the world, and right here in Ontario, human rights were under pressure and at risk of being reduced or ignored in a time of crisis. And the OHRC responded, thanks to the tireless efforts of its dedicated team. OHRC staff from diverse backgrounds contributing an expert range of talents, including legal, policy, communication, and often behind-the-scenes skills like information technology and administration, kept us solidly moving forward. Despite the challenges of remote work, our staff continued their deep commitment to advancing human rights, and gave the best of themselves to make this happen.

We also saw this commitment from our Commissioners, who steadfastly studied our work to provide their keen ideas and insights throughout the year. Like our staff, the Commissioners played a critical role in supporting the OHRC’s mandate with their thoughtful advice and strategic direction. And we saw a similar commitment from the many individuals and groups across the province, who are a testament to the vibrancy of their communities. These community advisors have continued to support the OHRC by sharing their lived realities, advising and guiding us, and alerting us to emerging issues – just as they have done for 60 years. On behalf of the OHRC, I thank you all for committing to promote justice and peace in our part of the world. 

Respect, equality and dignity are at the core of the OHRC and the Code. In 2020–21, these inalienable values and human rights were definitely under pressure. But with the contributions of so many people across Ontario, they did not diminish or break.

Ena Chadha
Chief Commissioner

Celebrating 60 years

60 years: celebrating the past, accepting the challenge of the future

To me, human rights means respect … equal access to justice … being in touch with some of the very most important things in this universe. Human rights to me means that we get to live in a world with equality and peace.

To me, human rights means that you have the right to love who you want … respect for our differences … the ability to live your life without fear … allow people to live with dignity, freedom, equality, peace and justice … create equal opportunities for all … built on mutual respect and understanding. Human rights also means having a lever for those who experience inequality.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission to me means that we all get to live in a world of peace and equality, which makes us all happier … it means a life free from poverty and a life full of opportunity. The Ontario Human Rights Commission means bringing this vision to life.

These are a few of the words that kicked off the OHRC’s virtual celebration on March 29, 2021, as we celebrated its 60th anniversary. This YouTube event marked the start of a 15-month period of commemoration and celebration of both the OHRC’s 60th anniversary and the 60th anniversary of Ontario’s Human Rights Code in June 2022.

The OHRC was built on the dedication and sacrifices of people who challenged the status quo as individuals, and as members of larger communities. At the virtual celebration, we shared just a few of the many stories from the visionaries who have led us, pushed us and worked with us to make lasting positive change across Ontario.

From our founding in 1961, the principles of dignity and inclusion have inspired our work and served as the cornerstone of the transformative changes the OHRC has achieved in its 60 years of human rights advocacy.

This spirit of dignity and inclusion has always been embodied in our work with communities, as we collectively seek to eliminate the root causes of systemic discrimination. As the OHRC recognizes its achievements, these achievements are not ours alone. This has been a shared journey realized through the insights, vision and tenacity of the individuals and communities across Ontario who share a commitment to equity and respect.

Human rights are first and foremost about elevating the voices of marginalized groups, so that everyone can be heard equally with dignity and compassion. This 15-month celebration is a testament to the many dynamic people who have propelled the OHRC to be a recognized human rights leader in Ontario and around the world.

This year is an opportunity to look back at the human rights heroes who led the way, celebrate the tireless community advocates who continue to advance human rights in an era of uncertainty. It is also an opportunity to nurture the next generation of human rights leaders who are redefining the social realities and who will transform the way we conceptualize equality rights for decades to come.

 

View the virtual celebration

A full video of the March 29 event is available on YouTube or through the OHRC website. The video features a variety of visionaries from the past and the present, who share their personal experiences advancing human rights in Ontario, and add their thoughts on what the future holds. These include past and current chief commissioners and commissioners, people whose human rights cases led to ground-breaking change, and community partners who support us and challenge us to continue to advance human rights.

 

Many ways to take part – watch for details

There will be more celebrations over the months leading up to the 60th anniversary of the Human Rights Code in June 2022, and various ways to take part. We will regularly update our website with what is coming up as plans are finalized.

 

Media highlights

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Zahra Vaid @zahravaid
Human rights is access to justice for those who have been excluded, today & historically, from seeking redress for wrongs done to them. It is a space, in law & beyond, for intersectional analysis & restorative justice. Most importantly, human rights can save lives. #OHRCat60

 

Hockey Hall of Fame @HockeyHallFame
In 1986 Justine Blainey-Broker was awarded the right to play in the MTHL after being denied due to gender (after she already earned a spot on a team). Join the @OntHumanRights in celebrating 60 years of protecting Ontarians.

 

Human Rights Canada @CdnHumanRights
Congratulations on a terrific milestone! We loved hearing all these positive messages!

 

Sonjiapridham @pleefs
Thank you for all the hard work you do. There is so much discrimination going on I face it all the time for disability. I feel empowered to know I can fight back and that is a big comfort to me.

 

Youtube iconYouTube live stream comment highlights

Fazela Haniff
Congratulations ORHC. I had the pleasure of working as a consultant when I headed up the Urban Alliance On Race Relations 1990-1991. Great to be a witness to all the achievements of the OHRC.

 

Lorin MacDonald
#accessibilitydoneright Thank you!

 

Wendy Porch
Congratulations on 60 years! Your work is needed now more than ever as we see the pandemic magnify existing inequities. Thank you!

 

Jacquelin Pegg
It's so good to hear about these important cases from the people who fought them. What a service they and the Commission have done for the public, over so many years.

 

Robert Snikkar
Keep challenging the complacency of our institutions and our societal biases - produce more justice for the others.

 

Open quotation markVideo quotes

“I’m sure he had a tiny budget; I don’t think he had more than one or two employees in those early years at the Commission so it was a tiny operation … He printed up pamphlets and brochures and distributed them and travelled around in his Volkswagen Beetle telling everybody about the Commission, sent out information to everybody he knew in Canada and the States.”
- Lawrence Hill, speaking about his father, Daniel Hill, OHRC 60th anniversary kick-off event

 

“So at the age of 10 I wanted to play hockey with my brother, and they told me little girls weren’t allowed. I was allowed to practice with him, but I was not allowed to play with him. I was told that the girls should play with the girls, that boys should play with the boys … we finally did win, and I did get a chance to play hockey with the boys … full contact, body checking. All five-foot-four of me, with six-foot guys. And I loved it!”
- Justine Blainey-Broker, OHRC 60th anniversary kick-off event

 

“The Commission’s approach of working with rather than working for communities I think is a very critical practice of the Commission…the Commission by forming partnerships has validated, legitimized the experience of ordinary people, given credibility to the hard work that community-based organizations with very little resources do, and benefited in that by involving them as equal partners the Commission’s own work has been enriched and gained in credibility.”
- Dr. Alok Mukherjee, interim chief commissioner, 1992–93

 

“The parties managed to reach an agreement with nine movie theatres who all worked toward the agreement and the settlement and from that settlement was where we saw rear-window captioning services available at movie theatres. That created quite a different experience … I could have a conversation with my family about what I saw in the movie whereas prior to the technology it was about guesswork and trying to understand what I was watching on the big screen.”
- Gary Malkowski, OHRC 60th anniversary kick-off event

 


Muhammad Ali and the Ontario Human Rights Code 

On March 29, 2021, the day of the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s (OHRC) 60th anniversary, the Toronto Star ran an in-depth, multi-page photo feature story on the 55th anniversary of Muhammad Ali’s famous Toronto boxing match. This incredibly popular article, called “How Muhammad Ali’s iconic Canadian debut brought Ontario’s human rights code into focus,” showcased Ali, his civil rights activism and Canada’s first human rights statute, our very own Ontario Human Rights Code (Code).

In the early 1960s, through his friendships with Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, Ali stood as a strong supporter of the civil rights movement. In 1966, due to backlash for speaking out against the Vietnam War, his name change from Cassius Clay and conversion to Islam, Ali was denied access to American boxing arenas. He may have been ostracized for his beliefs in the U.S.A., but that loss was Canada’s gain, which is where this unique Ontario human rights story unfolds.

In March 1966, Ali arrived in Toronto for his historic match against Toronto boxer George Chuvalo at Maple Leaf Gardens. In the days leading up to this legendary fight, Ali gave a rousing and remarkable interview about his motivation for changing his name. Ali emphasized that “Clay was not my name. We want to be called after names of our people, names that fit us Black people and Clay was a White man’s name, it was a slave name, and I am no longer a slave.” A prominent symbol displayed in that interview was the Ontario Human Rights Code, which served as the backdrop to Ali declaring his right to assert his identity as a free Black man.

So, what’s the background on the background? Why was the Code the backdrop of Ali’s important human rights pronouncements, and was this intentional?

Ontario’s Code is a landmark statute, the first of its kind in Canada and preceding the American Civil Rights Act by two years. The Code was enacted in June 1962 to prohibit discrimination in signs, services, facilities, public accommodation, and employee and trade union membership on the grounds of race, creed, colour, nationality, ancestry and place of origin.

Today, we know Ali’s interview took place at 1260 Bay Street, where Ali attended to sign papers in the presence of the Athletic Commissioner, who shared office space with the OHRC. The first Director of the OHRC was Dr. Daniel G. Hill. The OHRC believes that Dr. Hill had a hand in placing the Code into Ali’s interview, given Hill’s dedication to the OHRC and penchant for proudly promoting the Code.

Celebrated author Lawrence Hill, son of Dr. Hill, recalled that in the 1960s, his father was a big promoter of “storefront access” to human rights, along with being a huge Ali fan. He explains, “My father was an avid and enthusiastic promoter of the OHRC. He talked about it everywhere he went and distributed posters, pamphlets and information about the OHRC assiduously and widely in Canada and the USA. He was also a supreme fan of Muhammad Ali. He was aware of the Ali-Chuvalo fight, because I remember him speaking of it and I remember the fight too.”

Hill “can speculate about how it came to be that Ali spoke in front of the poster of the Code, and I have no difficulty imagining that my father might have been behind the effort to put the poster in the background of the interview. It’s the kind of thing my father would have been delighted to do.”

Ali’s victory against Chuvalo on March 29, 1966, was monumental in several ways. He remained a fighter and victor in the face of political backlash and criticism from the U.S.A. and the sports world. While there was some resistance to his new identity, even in Canada, Ali stood strong. In Toronto, Ali sent a message around the globe that he was his own man with the inherent right to determine his self-identity. He made clear that he was not going to accept what his former name represented or be bound by it, and the Code is as a backdrop framed the importance of this point.

Fifty-five years after Ali’s big win and many sports figures today, such as Masai Ujiri of the Toronto Raptors, use sport to speak out against and confront racial injustice. We often see how culture influences sport and how sport influences culture, and how both coalesce through human rights.

At the OHRC’s heart is a commitment to promote and advance human rights in all social sectors, and its history includes equality rights in sports. In 1987, the OHRC fought for hockey player Justine Blainey-Broker’s gender equality to play hockey on a male team. In 1988, the OHRC represented an 11-year-old girl living with cerebral palsy in securing the right to use a ramp to participate in competitive bowling. Again, in 1993, the OHRC challenged gender discrimination by a provincial soccer association. In 2014, the OHRC engaged in a settlement requiring Hockey Canada to change its dressing room policies across Ontario, to respect and accommodate transgender athletes. And in 2016, the OHRC intervened in a successful challenge of the inappropriate use of Indigenous-themed logos and team names in municipal sports. Currently, the OHRC is working to address anti-Indigenous racism in lacrosse.

Over the past six decades, many prominent visionaries have had an important role in promoting the OHRC. The story of Muhammad Ali and the Code reminds us how racial equality and sports are a significant part of Ontario’s history of human rights. 

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Joe Callaghan @JoeCallaghan84
Today is the 55th anniversary of Toronto’s most iconic bout. It’s also the 60th anniversary of @OntHumanRights. Rather than mere coincidence, this — and the stirring visual of Ali affirming his name change in front of the code — was a confluence, some say.

COVID-19 and human rights

Entrenching a human rights policy approach during and after the COVID-19 pandemic

By late March 2020, Ontarians were well aware that COVID-19 had turned into a worldwide pandemic. Governments at all levels in Canada recognized they needed to act fast to avoid outbreaks in congregate living like long-term care homes and prisons, support front-line workers and add other supports like employment and rent subsidies, and job and tenancy protection.

However, without a deliberate human rights-based approach, the OHRC was very concerned the pandemic would make existing inequalities worse for vulnerable groups, both in the short and long term, especially for older persons, Indigenous peoples, racialized communities and persons with disabilities.

 

It started with policy guidance

In early April 2020, shortly after Ontario declared a state of emergency, the OHRC released a Policy statement on a human rights-based approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic. The statement guides all levels of government to put human rights at the centre of their policy, legal, regulatory, public health and emergency-related responses to the pandemic.

This policy statement called on governments to:

  • Approach preventing and treating COVID-19 as a human rights obligation
  • Respect the rights of First Nations, Métis and Inuit (Indigenous) peoples
  • Set strict limits on measures that infringe rights
  • Protect vulnerable groups
  • Respond to racism, ageism, ableism and other forms of discrimination
  • Strengthen human rights accountability and oversight.

Along with the policy statement, the OHRC released Actions consistent with a human rights-based approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic to help protect and promote the rights to health and life, housing, work and an adequate standard of living, as well as to respect the UN Declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples.

The OHRC’s statements were based on OHRC policies, engagement with OHRC advisory group members and Indigenous peoples, and a review of guidance from the United Nations, the European Union and leading Canadian and international human rights organizations.

The OHRC statements emphasize the need to entrench human rights principles in government responses to this pandemic and future crises, so that everyone benefits and no vulnerable groups are left behind. This focus continues to drive much of the OHRC’s work reaching out to government and other stakeholders to address the disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 in employment, retail and other services, the education system, congregate care living including prisons, testing and vaccine distribution, and health-care services including critical care triage.

 

Giving communities a voice in the pandemic response

Over the last two years, the OHRC has established five ongoing community engagement groups that meet regularly to provide advice and input on the OHRC’s strategic focus areas. They are:

  • Community Advisory Group
  • Indigenous Reconciliation Advisory Group
  • Poverty Advisory Group
  • Education Advisory Group
  • Employment Advisory Group.

Members represent a range of Code-protected groups and social areas.

COVID-19 presented an urgent need to connect with stakeholders and communities to hear about the pandemic’s impact on emerging and long-standing human rights issues. We needed to know the lived experience of people in real time to inform our own response to COVID-19.

Using our advisory group structure, the OHRC was able to connect with stakeholders immediately, and over the last year has heard from all five groups on a human rights-based approach to managing the pandemic across a range of potential policy, legal, regulatory, public health and emergency responses.

With input from these groups, the OHRC provided guidance to a range of sectors, including corrections, employment, education, health, housing, social services and long-term care.

The OHRC also engaged regularly with government ministries and COVID-19 tables, including the COVID-19 Bioethics Table, the Ontario Critical Care COVID-19 Command Centre, the COVID-19 Vulnerable Persons Table and the Vaccine Task Force sub-groups.

 

Indigenous engagement is an important step in pandemic response

Throughout the pandemic, the OHRC has engaged regularly with First Nations, Métis and Inuit individuals and organizations. Early on, the OHRC sought their guidance when developing its Policy statement on a human rights-based approach to managing COVID-19 pandemic that identifies respect for First Nations, Métis and Inuit rights as a core principle. As the pandemic progressed, the OHRC has continued to engage Indigenous partners on various issues including socio-demographic data collection, barriers to returning to school and vaccine distribution.

In its advisory group meetings, the OHRC has asked Indigenous members to share issues of particular concern to their communities. And the Chief Commissioner met with the leaders of many Indigenous communities and organizations to establish new relationships and learn about distinct community concerns and priorities. In all of these meetings, the OHRC has asked if there are ways it can be of assistance in addressing inequality.

The OHRC has also repeatedly called on government and other duty holders to consult with Indigenous leaders and knowledge-keepers when making decisions, taking action, and allocating resources to address the pandemic.

 

Asking – and answering – COVID-19 questions

In March 2020, the OHRC developed a series of questions and answers for understanding human rights and obligations during the pandemic. These cover the rights and responsibilities of employers and employees, tenants and landlords, as well as residential institutions.

As issues have arisen over the past year, the OHRC has updated this information to reflect issues such as:

  • Can an employer, landlord, store, school, municipality or other organization require me to wear a mask because of COVID-19?
  • Can my employer ask me if I have tested positive for COVID-19? Can they disclose that information and my name to other employees?
  • I do not believe in vaccinations (or masks and lockdowns). Does the Human Rights Code exempt me based on creed from COVID-19 requirements like providing proof of vaccination?

Online users visiting the OHRC’s English questions and answers page spent an average of over seven minutes reading this page. This is far greater than the time spent on any other OHRC website page over the past few years, and is also impressive considering the industry benchmark for effective page view time ranges from two to three minutes.

The Qs & As have played a valuable role in fielding concerns from the public, from housing and other service providers as well as from employers and employees. They also continue to be a valuable resource for media and stakeholder requests, and have helped sustain the message that the pandemic is a human rights issue.

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Shireen Jeejeebhoy @ShireenJ
If you’re concerned about your human rights during #coronavirus pandemic, here’s a Q&A. #COVID19 #onpoli #SelfIsolation #PhysicalDistancing

 

Ombudsman Toronto @ombudsmanTO
What are your human rights and obligations? Access the OHRC's new resource on your #COVIDRights

 


Socio-demographic data collection a vital tool

Since March 2020, the OHRC has heard from stakeholders, Indigenous organizations and public health experts about the importance of collecting and reporting on socio-demographic data during the pandemic. Throughout the past year, the OHRC has continued to recommend collecting and using this data to inform decision-making in a variety of sectors

If properly collected, demographic data is a valuable instrument and a best practice for promoting equity, especially during crises like COVID-19. Strong data allows healthcare leaders to identify populations at heightened risk of infection or transmission, to efficiently deploy scarce health resources, and to ensure all Ontarians have equal access to public health protections. If one segment of Ontario’s population is overlooked as we fight to flatten the curves, we risk prolonging the pandemic or triggering its resurgence.

In April 2020, the OHRC issued a statement encouraging the government to heed the advice of health and human rights experts who agree that Ontario needs demographic data to effectively fight COVID-19.

In October 2020, the OHRC met with Ontario’s Associate Chief Medical Officer of Health. The Ministry of Health then invited the OHRC to serve on the government’s COVID-19 Sociodemographic Data Consultation Group. This group met every two weeks until the end of 2020.

The group’s objectives were to provide input on the use of socio-demographic data being collected about people who had contracted the virus, to reduce inequities in COVID-19 infection and adverse health outcomes. They advised on how socio-demographic data should be:

  • Used to strengthen the response to COVID-19 infection, particularly for communities at greater risk of infection
  • Analyzed, interpreted and communicated to maximize benefits for affected communities, while avoiding stigmatization or other potential harms
  • Linked with other health system data, to reduce health disparities for individuals/communities at risk of COVID-19 infection.

The OHRC continues to actively monitor the government’s commitment to collect disaggregated socio-demographic human rights data on the COVID-19 response, and to offer its assistance.

 


Providing guidance for Ministry of Health regulatory changes

In June 2020, the OHRC made a submission to the Ministry of Health on proposed amendments to Ontario Regulation 329/04 made under the Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA). Among other things, the proposed amendments prescribed elements for collecting, using and reporting personal health information collected through the electronic health record.

Consistent with previous statements, the OHRC recommended that the government consider making sure that current and/or proposed amendments to the regulation do not bar collecting, using and disclosing information on vulnerable populations identified by grounds under Ontario’s Human Rights Code, collected through the electronic health record, as set out under PHIPA, including section 44 on disclosure for research and section 45 on disclosure for planning and managing the health system.

In its April 2020 guidance on a human rights-based approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic, the OHRC highlighted the need for government to collect health and other human rights data on the response to the pandemic, disaggregated by the grounds of Indigenous ancestry, race, ethnic origin, place of origin, citizenship status, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, social condition, etc. Referring to a recent letter from the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres to the special advisor on the Ontario Health Data Platform, the OHRC noted the essential need for including Indigenous-specific data in socio-demographic data collection for COVID-19. The OHRC also recognized the need for a longer-term solution to collect human rights information through the OHIP registration form.

 

Ontario Regulation 569 made under the Health Protection and Promotion Act

In June 2020, the OHRC welcomed the proposed amendment to Ontario Regulation 569 made under the Health Protection and Promotion Act (HPPA) that requires collecting information on race, income level, language and household size for people who test positive for a novel coronavirus, including COVID-19.

In our submission on this, as in our submission on amendments to Regulation 329/04, the OHRC recommended the Ministry of Health consider expanding the required collection of information to include other vulnerable populations identified in Ontario’s Human Rights Code, disaggregated by the grounds of Indigenous ancestry, race, ethnic origin, place of origin, citizenship status, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, social condition, etc.

 


Protecting against the discriminatory impact of critical care triage

In March 2020, human rights stakeholders and the media began raising concerns about a triage protocol that was developed for Ontario on how hospitals would withhold or withdraw critical care services if COVID-19 cases surged above ICU bed and ventilator capacity. (check against the PDF)

In early April 2020, the OHRC called on the Minister of Health to pull the protocol, begin consulting with vulnerable groups and advocacy organizations and develop an approach that followed human rights principles and laws. Ontario Health and the COVID-19 Bioethics Table had developed the protocol. They reached out to the OHRC and we welcomed the opportunity to help arrange and take part in discussions with human rights stakeholders.

During meetings held in spring, summer and late fall 2020, stakeholders, including ARCH Disability Law Centre, the AODA Alliance and the Canadian Association for Retired Persons raised serious concerns that the protocol disproportionately affected vulnerable groups and violated human rights.

In October, the OHRC wrote back to the Minister acknowledging the Bioethics Table had held productive consultations and made improvements in their latest proposals, but noting that significant human rights concerns remained. The OHRC called on the Ministry to:

  • Issue clear communications that health care providers must not use earlier versions of the protocol
  • Meaningfully consult with vulnerable groups and their representatives, including Indigenous peoples, Black and other racialized communities, people with disabilities, older persons as well as independent experts, for their perspectives and participation throughout the process to develop, finalize and implement a protocol
  • Ensure a revised protocol recognizes human rights as the primary guiding principle and law
  • Make sure there is a legislative basis for initiating the use of the protocol during a pandemic surge
  • Exclude any clinical assessment criteria or tools that are not validated for critical care triage and do not factor in the positive effect of accommodation supports on a person’s predicted mortality
  • Define short-term predicted mortality as the predicted risk of death in the initial weeks and months, and not one year after the onset of critical illness
  • Provide for governance and accountability mechanisms, including responsibility for initiating the protocol, patient consent and appeals, data collection and independent monitoring for negative consequences
  • Continue equitable COVID-19 prevention efforts to avoid the need to initiate the protocol and the negative impacts on vulnerable groups.

By end of 2020, the second wave of COVID-19 cases was well underway. Hospitals were now receiving modified versions of the protocol from Ontario’s COVID-19 Critical Care Command Centre after the Ministry had finally rescinded earlier versions. However, these revised documents were never shared directly with the OHRC and stakeholders.

The OHRC wrote to the Minister again in November, December and March and continues to call for public release of the most recent documents shared with hospitals and open consultation with vulnerable communities most affected by life-and-death decision-making on critical care triage.

 

Media highlights

 

Twitter iconTwitter

wendyporch @wendyporch
Thank you to @OntHumanRights for supporting representation from vulnerable groups in the development of any triage protocol. People with disabilities deserve a place at the table when their lives are literally on the line!

 


Advancing equitable vaccine distribution

In December 2020, the OHRC wrote to General (Retired) Rick Hillier, Chair of the Vaccine Distribution Task Force, to stress the important role that human rights principles, considerations and obligations should play in vaccine distribution planning.

The OHRC recognized the herculean task of planning and distributing vaccines across Ontario, while stressing that many Code-protected groups experience poverty and are more likely to be exposed to the risk of contagion, but are not as likely to be protected from COVID-19 by ready access to testing and health services. The letter stated it was imperative that access to vaccines be provided to all Ontarians without discrimination, and prioritized for the people who are most exposed and vulnerable to the risks.

The OHRC advised that a vaccine distribution strategy should be based on evidence of individuals’ increased risks of exposure, transmission or death rather than stereotypes; and should be framed in ways that avoid stigmatizing vulnerable groups. The strategy should also include disaggregated data collection and monitoring to ensure Code-protected groups experience equitable access to vaccines and are not disproportionately affected, and should make adjustments and accommodations where needed, especially where evidence shows groups have historically unequal access to health services.

In his response in February 2021, General (Retired) Hillier advised that the OHRC’s Policy statement on a human rights approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic and related guidance helped inform the development of an ethical framework for vaccine distribution, and that the framework should be read in conjunction with this policy statement. He noted that the importance of human rights protections and non-discrimination were explicitly reflected in the province's ethical framework, and thanked the OHRC for valuable insight on how human rights principles can play an important role in Ontario’s vaccine program.

As vaccine rollout continues, the Chief Commissioner and OHRC staff have met several times with senior managers from the Ministry of the Solicitor General and the Anti-Racism Directorate, to provide further human rights advice on the rollout for vulnerable people. The OHRC continues to promote how ethical and human rights obligations must be reflected in pandemic planning, with special attention to vulnerable communities.

 

Twitter

Lisa Richardson (She/Her) @RicharLisa
I just had the pleasure of meeting Ena Chadha, Chief Commissioner of @OntHumanRights, who spoke about the need for a human rights lens in vaccine distribution & about a backlash of anti-Indigenous racism in the context of Indigenous people being a priority group for the vaccine.

 


Working with Indigenous leaders and health-care professionals on vaccine issues

In December 2020, the Chief Commissioner and an OHRC team met with Ontario Regional Chief RoseAnne Archibald and a group of Indigenous health leaders to discuss COVID-19 vaccine roll out. Ontario Regional Chief Archibald, who serves on the government’s Vaccine Distribution Task Force, convened the meeting to hear from the OHRC and Indigenous health leaders on human rights concerns with access to vaccines. Her goal was to establish lines of communication with the OHRC and Indigenous health leaders to bring information to the Task Force.

The meeting touched on the unique needs of Indigenous communities living in urban and rural areas, and on First Nation reserves, in accessing the vaccine. The OHRC’s Chief Commissioner spoke about the need for ongoing socio-demographic data collection during vaccine roll-out, maintaining open lines of communication, and the need to flag the potential for hate, stigmatization and racism against groups receiving the vaccine on a priority basis.

The OHRC continues to monitor the vaccine roll-out and its impact on Code-protected groups, including Indigenous peoples.

 


COVID and corrections

As part of our work relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, the OHRC has also been engaged with the Ministry of the Solicitor General (SOLGEN) on the state of COVID-19 transmission in Ontario's adult correctional system. Since the outset of the pandemic, the OHRC has been receiving regular reports from SOLGEN, including detailed information on custody numbers, outbreaks and measures being taken to respond. The OHRC has consistently provided input to SOLGEN on the importance of applying a human rights lens, with a particular focus on enhancing transparency and communication, supporting family contact, trying to maintain custody numbers that are as low as possible, and the importance of clear human-rights based tracking and data collection. Ensuring a human rights-oriented approach to addressing the pandemic is critical given the high number of prisoners with mental health disabilities, and the over-representation of Black and Indigenous people inside the system.

 


Examining human rights in long-term care review

In August 2020, the OHRC wrote to Associate Chief Justice Frank N. Marrocco, the Chair of the Independent Long-Term Care COVID-19 Commission, to stress the important role that human rights principles should play in the review of government and long-term care responses to COVID-19. The OHRC drew the commission’s attention to the OHRC’s Policy statement on a human rights approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic and related actions. The OHRC emphasized that both the residents and the staff of long-term care facilities in Ontario are vulnerable populations at risk of discrimination based on disability, age, race and other grounds protected in the Human Rights Code.

 


Avoiding a pandemic of evictions

Housing is a human right. International law states that Canada must work towards making sure everyone has access to adequate and affordable housing. But some people, based on factors such as race, ancestry, disability, sex, family status and social and economic status, do not enjoy the housing rights they are entitled to. When multiple factors intersect, the disadvantage increases and people are at even greater risk of discrimination, poverty and even homelessness.

COVID-19 has reinforced that housing means more than just a physical space: it lays the foundation for our safety, security and dignity. Yet due to job loss, health and other social and economic factors, many vulnerable groups have lost housing during the pandemic or are at serious risk of losing their housing.

In addition to hearing about the threat of losing housing because of the pandemic, the OHRC monitored reports of the serious barriers tenants faced at the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB), particularly during virtual hearings. Legal clinics were reporting that low-income tenants were being denied justice because they could not take part in virtual hearings due to the lack of technology or reliable Internet because of poverty, disability or remote location. At the same time, there were reports that LTB was unable to offer online mediation or facilitate resolution discussions between landlords and tenants.

In November 2020, TVO published the Chief Commissioner’s opinion editorial, “Staying home during COVID-19 isn’t possible if you don’t have a home.” This op-ed called for a shift in focus to recognize that safe, accessible and affordable housing is an equity imperative rather than just a financial commodity. OHRC staff also met with counsel representing groups of tenants at the LTB to learn first-hand about the issues.

The Chief Commissioner met with the Executive Chair of Tribunals Ontario, to discuss what immediate action they could take to address the access-to-justice issues at the LTB. The Executive Chair was receptive to the OHRC’s concerns and outlined several initiatives Tribunals Ontario would pilot to address issues of access. The OHRC continues to monitor this closely and is prepared to take further action if required.

 

Media highlights

 

Twitter IconTwitter

CERA @CERAOntario
If you have an underlying health condition or disability and are worried about landlord entry during COVID, you can ask for accommodation under the @OntHumanRights Code. Our self-advocacy toolkit walks you through this process https://bit.ly/3sQwhLM
#onpoli #Right2Housing

 

Open quotation markQuotes

“I can remember having public meetings [on mental health] in universities for example, colleges and universities, and the rooms being packed and line-ups of students, faculty, and community members, with questions or comments… It really underlines the issues out there and the need to address them. In schools, in workplaces, in families and out and about in our communities. It was a really important piece of education and policy and people understood for the first time that when the Code said disability that they were included and they could do something about the discrimination they were facing.”
- Barbara Hall, chief commissioner, 2005–2015

 

“I believe that community legal clinics play a very important role in advancing social justice in Ontario … all of these clinics play a very important role in advancing justice through systemic advocacy work … And that really intersects with the systemic advocacy work on the part of OHRC.”
- Avvy Go, OHRC 60th anniversary kick-off event

Indigenous reconciliation

Continuing the conversation with Indigenous leaders

The Chief Commissioner had the privilege of meeting with several Indigenous leaders from various territories across the province. The Chief Commissioner also met with representatives of the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres, the Ontario Native Women’s Association and with the Ontario Regional Chief.

The Chief Commissioner engaged with these leaders to continue building trusting relationships based on dignity and respect. The purpose of the meetings was to listen and learn about each community’s concerns and priorities, especially in the context of COVID-19, and to ask if there were ways the OHRC could help the communities to address inequalities in health care, children’s educational needs, systemic racism and fostering truth and reconciliation. As a result of these meetings, the Chief Commissioner wrote two opinion editorials, Why it’s dangerous to be disabled and Indigenous in Canada, published by National Newswatch, on the prevalence of discrimination in health-care services and the serious need to be attuned to intersecting grounds in ensuring equitable treatment, and COVID-19 fears are fanning the flames of racism in Kenora, published by TVO, denouncing the surging hate, harassment and propagation of misinformation in the pandemic. 

The Chief Commissioner also met with representatives of the Nation to Nation Indigenous Employee Network, which consists of First Nations, Métis and Inuit professionals within the Ontario Public Service.

 


Connecting with the Chiefs of Ontario Leadership Council

When Ena Chadha was appointed Chief Commissioner in July 2020, she made a commitment to reaffirm and promote the OHRC’s priority of building trusting relationships with First Nations, Métis and Inuit leaders and communities, and to continue to learn how to best integrate their issues and world views into the OHRC’s work.

One example of bringing this commitment to life was her presentation at the November 2020 meeting of the Chiefs of Ontario Leadership Council. Composed of the Grand Chiefs of Political Territorial Organizations from across Ontario, and leaders of other independent nations, the Leadership Council works with the Ontario Regional Chief to set, coordinate and implement First Nations leaders’ priorities. Ontario’s Minister of Indigenous Affairs also attended.

The Chief Commissioner spoke about the role of the OHRC’s Indigenous Reconciliation Advisory Group, and about how this group provides much-needed advice and insight on issues such as ways the OHRC can focus policy development to address inequalities in service provision experienced by Indigenous peoples in Ontario.

The Chief Commissioner also spoke about the serious concerns she has heard about Indigenous child and family welfare, education gaps and language rights, the lack of proper consultation before enacting legislation that affects First Nation rights, and inequities in health care and policing – which have all been exacerbated during the pandemic.

She then outlined the steps the OHRC is taking to support First Nations having a voice in pandemic responses and other ongoing issues, and the areas where the OHRC would benefit from their collective wisdom. Each step is an important element of moving forward together on the path to reconciliation and lasting change.

This meeting gave rise to the Chief Commissioner’s efforts to support Ontario Regional Chief Archibald’s work on the COVID-19 vaccine taskforce.

 


Continuing the path forward with the OFIFC

As agreed in their Memorandum of Understanding, the OHRC and the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres (OFIFC) continued to work together to share information and data, engage with urban Indigenous people on policy development, and coordinate provincial advocacy in key areas including COVID-19 data collection.

The OFIFC actively took part in both the OHRC’s Community Advisory Group and Indigenous Reconciliation Advisory Group, as well as involving the OHRC in other initiatives, such as its Indigenous Human Rights Program. The OHRC also contributes to the OFIFC Youth Opportunities Fund Collaborative Table that is focusing on developing, implementing and evaluating strategies to transform the public education system for urban Indigenous youth in Ontario.

The OHRC congratulates OFIFC Executive Director Sylvia Maracle on her upcoming retirement after 42 years in this leadership position. We are grateful for the insight and wisdom she has shared with the OHRC, and celebrate the many ways she has advanced the human rights of Indigenous people across the province. We were honoured to have her as a featured speaker in our recent virtual celebration of the OHRC’s 60th anniversary and hear about her memories working with the OHRC in its early days of promoting and enforcing human rights.

 


Engaging with the Elders Council  

In September 2020, OHRC staff had the opportunity to attend a virtual meeting of the Elders’ Council to seek guidance on ongoing Indigenous reconciliation policy development issues. The Elders’ Council supports the work of the Ministry of the Attorney General’s Indigenous Justice Division.

Composed of 13 Indigenous Elders, Senators and Knowledge Keepers from communities across the province, the Elders Council is committed to supporting the reclamation of Indigenous legal systems and strengthening justice for Indigenous people across Ontario. In the meeting, the OHRC requested guidance on how non-Indigenous organizations could make sure they are respecting First Nations, Métis and Inuit rights and diverse world views when developing and delivering services for Indigenous peoples. The Council shared with the OHRC their insights about Indigenous knowledge and the ways of being of Indigenous peoples.

The OHRC congratulates the Elders’ Council on receiving the 2020 Law Foundation award in recognition of their championing access to justice.

 


Removing discriminatory words, images

For many years, Indigenous peoples and racialized communities have raised concerns over the display of derogatory words and images including names, terms, descriptions, depictions, symbols and other markers used for sports teams, street and road names, geographic areas, landmarks, facilities, statues, plaques and commemorative days.

In fall 2020, the OHRC responded to a letter about a debate over the renaming of Colonization Road in the Town of Fort Frances and the potential implications under the Human Rights Code. The OHRC based this response on the human rights principles and guidance it used to help settle the case of Gallant v Mississauga, where the City of Mississauga committed to removing from its sports facilities all Indigenous-themed mascots, symbols, names and images related to non-Indigenous sports organizations.

The OHRC recognizes that some words and images might negatively affect the ability of Code-protected individuals and groups to take part and benefit equally in their community. Human rights law has found images and words that degrade people because of their ancestry, race, colour and ethnic origin, among other grounds, may in some instances amount to a denial of service and violate the Code. In some cases, it may be necessary to revisit long-standing norms in our society. We highlighted the importance of engaging with individuals and communities to promote understanding when concerns are raised. We urged municipalities to take the first step in removing barriers by collaborating with affected groups to develop policies on the use of names and images, to promote welcoming and inclusive environments for all groups in society.

The Town of Fort Frances has since issued a public statement saying it is actively investigating a meaningful approach to the potential renaming of Colonization Road as a small step forward in the path to reconciling past, present and future relationships with neighbouring Indigenous communities. The town’s statement mentions the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the OHRC, and its obligations under the Code. The town is also working on a street naming/renaming policy.

In the coming year, the OHRC aims to develop a general policy statement on the discriminatory display of words and images, to help build awareness across Ontario about negative impacts and promote a collaborative human rights-based approach to resolving issues.

 

Media highlights

 


Supporting the fight against racism in health care

Upon reading the Chief Commissioner’s opinion editorial, Why it’s dangerous to be disabled and Indigenous in Canada, published by National Newswatch, the Brian Sinclair Working Group wrote to the OHRC requesting support for its efforts to fight medical racism. In January 2021, the OHRC wrote a letter supporting the Brian Sinclair Working Group’s open letter: Adding the fight against racism to the Canada Health Act: the time is now. The OHRC shared its deep concern about the tragic events surrounding the death of Joyce Echaquan, and the many other heart-rending examples of deep-seated systemic racism that First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples continue to face when seeking medical care in Canada.

The OHRC recognized the significant impact the Canada Health Act has on health services delivery in the provinces and territories, and the need for human rights principles, including anti-racism, to be entrenched in that Act as well as all other federal and provincial legislation. The OHRC also emphasized the need for all stakeholders in the health-care system to adopt and implement an intersectional approach to anti-racism and human rights policies and strategies in consultation with Indigenous groups, communities and organizations, as well as other racialized groups affected by systemic racism and the legacies of colonialism in the healthcare system. 

 


Addressing anti-Indigenous racism in lacrosse

In December 2020, in recognition of the importance of lacrosse to Indigenous cultures and in the face of troubling reports of racial slurs and mistreatment in lacrosse games involving Six Nations of the Grand First Nation (Six Nations) lacrosse players, the OHRC announced it would work and meet with Six Nations, the Ontario Lacrosse Association (OLA) and the Canadian Lacrosse Association (CLA) to engage in discussions about how to address concerns of systemic racism against Indigenous lacrosse players.

An expert Indigenous facilitator will support the discussions that will start with concerns raised by members of the Six Nations lacrosse community. This will be the first step in the important process of rebuilding trust, fostering accountability and promoting reconciliation.

The OHRC recognizes that lacrosse has been a way for Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities to connect with each other, and can help build relationships that unite, uphold reconciliation and proactively address racism.

 

Media highlights

 


Challenging racism in the North

In February 2021, the OHRC heard reports of Indigenous people in Kenora being refused service by local businesses under the assumption that they were carriers of COVID-19, due to an outbreak on the nearby Wabaseemoong Independent Nations. Discriminatory action against any persons or communities who have, or are perceived to have COVID-19 is prohibited by the Ontario Human Rights Code. While anecdotal, these allegations of racism were nonetheless disturbing, and mirrored the atmosphere of intolerance and discrimination East Asians – Ontarian or otherwise – faced during the 2002–04 SARS outbreak.

The OHRC acted swiftly by releasing a public statement citing concerns about racist rhetoric and misinformation in Kenora and beyond, and condemning any and all vile acts of discrimination. The OHRC also urged duty-holders and the public to refer to its online Questions and Answers on human rights concerns and obligations during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in the context of public spaces and organizations. An opinion editorial titled “COVID-19 fears are fanning the flames of racism in Kenora,” by Chief Commissioner Ena Chadha, was published online by TVO shortly after.

Thanks to the OHRC’s leadership on this issue, the Chief Commissioner was invited to speak at the “Ga Kina Together – Kenora Call to Action” virtual event, where the Human Rights Legal Support Centre (HRLSC) provided information to Wabaseemong community members on how to protect their human rights. Ultimately, the joint response by the OHRC and HRLSC positively contributed to the mosaic of messages expressed by local leaders and community members asking area residents to be kind to one another as public health partners fought to contain the outbreak in the area.

The OHRC will continue to respond quickly to reports of racism and other human rights concerns as the pandemic continues to challenge communities across Ontario.

 

Media highlights

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Tania Cameron @TaniaCameron
I received an unexpected call from Ena Chadha, Chief Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission. She expressed her support of my advocacy & assisting people of Wabaseemoong that have denied service in #Kenora @OntHumanRights

 

Brian Chang @bfchangTO
Good to see some response & acknowledgement from @OntHumanRights because of @TaniaCameron's advocacy and strength calling out racist #KenoraKaren. Denial of service to Indigenous families is a racist and intolerable act. Unacceptable.

 

Open quotation markQuote

“The HRLSC and the OHRC have for the last number of years really worked hard to foster a relationship because we know that the system is better when all three parts of it work together and so the OHRC and the HRLSC continuously look for ways to support each other’s work.”
- Sharmaine Hall, Executive Director, Human Rights Legal Support Centre, OHRC 60th anniversary kick-off event

 


Providing advice, support to the Indigenous Human Rights Program

The OHRC was pleased to continue its support for the Indigenous Human Rights Program (IHRP). Established by Pro Bono Students Canada (PBSC), in partnership with the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres (OFIFC), the IHRP is developing an Indigenous cultural competency and human rights training program for lawyers and law students, creating podcasts highlighting experiences of Indigenous people at human rights tribunals across Canada, and launching free human rights legal public education sessions at Indigenous Friendship Centres in Toronto and Ottawa. Staffed by law students and pro bono human rights lawyers, the clinics will deliver culturally-appropriate human rights assistance in a safe and welcoming setting, and help fill a long-standing gap in legal services for Indigenous peoples.

The OHRC is an active member of the IHRP Advisory Council, and our staff have delivered training on Ontario’s human rights legislation and system for law students taking part in the program. The OHRC also supported the PBSC in successful applications for funding, including a recent grant of $100,000 from the Law Foundation of Ontario’s Access to Justice Fund. The Chief Commissioner met with the OFIFC Director of Policy to discuss ideas of how the program can be used to facilitate redress at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

 


Indigenous Reconciliation Advisory Group expands its membership

The OHRC’s Indigenous Reconciliation Advisory Group has expanded to now have 22 members from diverse First Nations (on-reserve and off-reserve), Métis and Inuit communities and organizations including youth and Elders. The Human Rights Legal Support Centre and Canadian Human Rights Commission also continue to take part.

The advisory group met by videoconference in December 2020 and February 2021. Members shared how the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated pre-existing inequalities and marginalization experienced by First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities across all areas of life. Members also advised the OHRC on the type of policy action that would most effectively respond to community human rights needs.

 

Open quotation markQuote

“The Commission has a very significant role to play with respect to public education and I think that the public education is more than a commissioner’s opinion piece in the news. I think it has a lot more visible and sustainable work to do. I think that the Human Rights Commission should play a role in the education of the civil service and other commissions in terms of understanding the origins of Indigenous-based inequities. I think the Commission should set very specific examples both in strategic plans short- and long-term. I think that the Commission should be reporting to other kinds of inquiries that are raised.”
- Sylvia Maracle, member of OHRC Indigenous Reconciliation Advisory Group

 

Introducing the Indigenous Reconciliation Advisory Group 

  • Karen Drake, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University
  • Brian Eyolfson, Commissioner OHRC
  • Nancy Rowe, Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation
  • Grand Chief Joel Abram, Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians 
  • Brian David, Mohawks of Akwesasne
  • Barb General, Six Nations of the Grand River
  • Grand Council Chief Glen Hare, Anishinabek Nation 
  • Jeffery Hewitt, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University
  • Julie Hodson and Nicole Parsons, Tungasuvvingat Inuit
  • Ray Hookimaw, Feathers of Hope
  • Luke Hunter, Nishnawbe Aski Nation
  • Ogichidaa Francis Kavanaugh, Grand Council Treaty #3
  • Dalton Latondress, Métis Nation of Ontario Youth Council
  • Sylvia Maracle, Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres
  • Coralee McGuire-Cyrette, Ontario Native Women’s Association
  • Kimberly Murray, Indigenous Justice Division, Ministry of the Attorney General
  • Jennifer St. Germain, Métis Nation of Ontario
  • Maurice Switzer, Nimkii Communications
  • Keith Smith and Gabrielle Heroux, Canadian Human Rights Commission
  • Ramona Reece, Human Rights Legal Support Centre

 

Criminal justice

Addressing anti-Black racism in policing: The OHRC’s inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black people by the Toronto Police Service

 

A Disparate Impact shows the numbers behind the accounts

In August 2020, the OHRC released A Disparate Impact, the second interim report on its inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black people by the Toronto Police Service (TPS). The inquiry was launched in November 2017, with the goal of pinpointing problem areas and making recommendations to eliminate them, as a key step to help build trust between the police and Black communities.

A Disparate Impact included two expert reports from criminologist Dr. Scot Wortley, who analyzed quantitative TPS data. The results highlighted in Racial Disparity in Arrests and Charges: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service (based on data from 2013 to 2017), and Use of force by the Toronto Police Service: Final report (based on data from 2016 to 2017) are highly disturbing, and confirm what Black communities have said for decades – that Black people bear a disproportionate burden of law enforcement.

For example, although they represented only 8.8% of Toronto’s population:

  • Black people represented almost one-third (32%) of all the charges in the charge dataset, while White people and other racialized groups were under-represented
  • Only one-fifth (20%) of all charges resulted in conviction, but charges against Black people were more likely to be withdrawn and less likely to result in a conviction – this raises systemic concerns about charging practices
  • Black people represented over one-third (34%) of people involved in single-charge “out-of-sight” driving charges (such as driving without valid insurance), which could only be discovered after the police have observed the race of the driver or stopped and questioned the driver
  • Black people represented almost four in 10 (38%) people involved in cannabis charges, despite conviction rates and many studies showing that they use cannabis at similar rates to White people
  • Black people were involved in approximately one-quarter (25%) of all Special Investigations Unit (SIU) cases resulting in death, serious injury or allegations of sexual assault, and almost four in 10 (39%) cases involving lower-level use of force (where force did not rise to the SIU threshold) – and this over-representation cannot be explained by factors such as patrol zones in low-crime and high-crime neighbourhoods, violent crime rates and/or average income
  • Black people were more likely to be involved in use of force cases that involved proactive policing (for example, when an officer decides to stop and question someone) than reactive policing (for example, when the police respond to a call for assistance).

The OHRC called on the TPS, Toronto Police Services Board (TPSB) and the City of Toronto to formally establish a process with Black communities, Black organizations and the OHRC, to adopt and implement legally enforceable remedies that will result in fundamental change. 

Black community and advocacy groups such as the Black Legal Action Centre, the Association of Black Law Enforcers and the Canadian Association of Black Lawyers made statements supporting the OHRC’s call for legally enforceable remedies. 

The same week the OHRC released A Disparate Impact, the TPSB released its Police Reform Report, which contained 81 recommendations. The OHRC made a deputation to the TPSB in response. We told the TPSB that the approach of the past will not work – action plans without accountability and enforceability are not meaningful. Black communities have not seen meaningful change for decades, despite numerous reports.

In the meantime, the OHRC continues to hear from Black communities in Toronto about the damaging effects of policing, including over-charging and excessive use of force, systemic racism and anti-Black bias in policing – the same issues we have tried to confront for over four decades.

A Disparate Impact was cited by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice as part of the social context of systemic racism in policing when determining an appropriate sentence for Officer Michael Theriault, whose assault of Dafonte Miller with a metal pipe while off duty sparked outrage from Black communities across Canada.

 

Next steps: a final report

We have experienced some delays related to COVID-19 and the receipt of information from the TPS and TPSB, but our work has continued. Dr. Wortley is completing his analysis of data related to TPS stop, question and search practices. As well, the OHRC has been analyzing TPS and TPSB policies, procedures, training and accountability mechanisms. We have completed interviews of TPS leaders and have sought input from TPS officers, and continue to engage with Black community leaders and advocacy groups. 

A final report, which will include an extensive series of recommendations, is now planned for release in fall 2021.

 

Open quotation marksQuote

“I think the accomplishment I’m most proud of is the fact that we began working with the Black community again. We had been seen, I think, to have been working with the police quite clearly trying to get them to move in the right direction, but it was really important to me that all the communities that the province – that the Human Rights Commission is supposed to serve understood that we were there to serve them.”
- Ruth Goba, acting chief commissioner, Feb. 2015 – Sept. 2015

 

Media highlights

 

Twitter iconTwitter 

Paolo De Buono, Rainbow #BLM, MSc, JD, OCT @misterdebuono
The Ontario Human Rights Commission released its A Disparate Impact report today, confirming the deep impact of anti-Black systemic racism in Toronto (the data is so clear!) & our need as educators to act on changing ourselves & our education systems.

 

Kerri L. P. @piquette_kerri
Systemic and anti-Black racism in policing exists in Ontario. Period. All emergency services should be reading the Disparate Impact to understand the scope of the issue at hand so we can take necessary action within our services to make change and advocate for our patients.

 


Continuing to monitor TPS race-based data collection

Since the Toronto Police Services Board (TPSB) approved the Race-Based Data Collection, Analysis and Public Reporting Policy in 2019, the Toronto Police Service has taken several steps to advance its work on race-based data collection.

In April 2020, the OHRC commented on this progress, stating: “the OHRC is pleased that the TPSB adopted a policy on collecting race data. This is a significant step forward in the TPSB’s efforts to identify and address systemic discrimination.” Since then, the OHRC has taken part in multiple discussions with the TPS, with particular emphasis on bolstering the depth and breadth of data collection during the next phases, consistent with some of the data-related recommendations in the OHRC’s 2019 Policy on eliminating racial profiling in law enforcement.

 


OHRC supports the Independent Civilian Review on Missing Persons

In January 2020, the then chief commissioner, Executive Director and staff met with Justice Gloria Epstein and Lead Counsel to provide recommendations for proceeding with the Independent Civilian Review on Missing Persons. The Missing Persons Review team spoke positively about the OHRC’s Policy on eliminating racial profiling in law enforcement and other OHRC products, saying they were of great use to the review.

The OHRC made several recommendations, including:

  • Contextualize the failures of missing persons investigations as part of the broader phenomenon of under-policing
  • Emphasize intersectionality and underscore the impact that intersectionality of marginalized identities has in interactions with police services
  • Consider deploying the “Philadelphia Model” to allow for ongoing, external review of missing persons investigations
  • Review the OHRC’s settlement agreements relating to Waterman and the bathhouse raids to determine if building on these agreements could be useful in eliminating police bias against LGBTQ2+ communities
  • Consider recommending that efforts be made to de-stigmatize LGBTQ2+ identities within racialized communities
  • Consider recommending that front-line service providers serve as liaisons with the police in cases of missing persons.

In August 2020, the OHRC took part in a roundtable to discuss the possible recommendations the reviewers may wish to consider making in their final report. The Executive Director provided OHRC perspectives on the need for greater accountability in policing, transforming police culture and police relations with racialized communities. The Chief Commissioner and the Executive Director met with the Missing Persons Review team on two additional occasions, to support the team’s understanding of human rights principles and remedies, as well as issues around transparency and accountability.

In April 2021, Justice Epstein released her final report, Missing and Missed. This four-volume report contains many findings and recommendations that reflect the OHRC’s input. For example, the report cited A Disparate Impact, which focused on racial profiling, and found that like Black communities, people also faced disparate levels of investigation based on their sexual orientation, and called on the Toronto Police Service to undertake an organization change project as the OHRC had recommended in 2016.

The Missing and Missed report also cited and endorsed the OHRC’s guidance on steps the TPS could take to identify and eliminate systemic bias in the services it provides. As well, the report calls on the TPS to apply a human rights lens in its investigations, and look at how human rights characteristics intersect to create unique experiences of discrimination, as was the case where most of the victims in the inquiry were gay and racialized.

Missing and Missed applied various OHRC policies, including the Policy on discrimination and harassment because of sexual orientation, the Policy on preventing discrimination because of gender identity and gender expression, and the Policy on preventing discrimination based on mental health disabilities and addictions. As well, the reviewers also incorporated several cases the OHRC was involved in at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario involving sexual orientation and gender identity.

Missing and Missed acknowledged the OHRC as an expert in recognizing and addressing issues of systemic and overt discrimination. It also:

  • Recommended that the TPS work closely with the OHRC on its equity plan
  • Highlighted the OHRC‘s analysis of structural impunity for systemic racism in the absence of monitoring court and tribunal findings of discrimination
  • Identified the use of settlement agreements under the Human Rights Code as a tool for reform.

In the next few months, the OHRC will more thoroughly review Missing and Missed, to identify areas it can follow up on with the TPS to make sure it provides equitable services regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, race, or other grounds that are protected by the Code.

 

Open quotation marksQuote

“In the early years when the Commission was first proposing adding sexual orientation to the Code in annual reports – that was very welcome news … very, very welcome news. And so each year when the Commission published its report, we would always hold it up and say, ‘It’s time, it’s time, come on politicians, it’s time to move.’”
- Rev. Dr. Brent Hawkes, OHRC 60th anniversary kick-off event

 


Agreement a significant step forward with Peel Regional Police

In October 2020, the OHRC, Peel Regional Police (PRP) and its Board (PRPSB) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) committing to develop and implement legally binding remedies to identify and eliminate systemic racism in policing, promote transparency and accountability, and enhance Black, other racialized and Indigenous communities’ trust in policing throughout Peel Region.

The OHRC will provide human rights guidance to the PRP and PRPSB on initiatives to identify and eliminate systemic racism in its service delivery and employment practices. Building on the principles laid out in the OHRC’s Policy on eliminating racial profiling in law enforcement, the parties will work collaboratively to adopt holistic and binding remedies to address structural changes, the role of policing, policy and procedural changes, accountability and monitoring, as well as community calls for de-escalation and defunding.

The parties also commit to robust engagement with Black, other racialized and Indigenous communities in the Peel Region to learn from their experiences before finalizing a legally binding agreement.

Since the MOU was signed, several notable developments have taken place. The OHRC and the PRP have had in-depth discussions about proposed recommendations for identifying and addressing systemic racism. As the PRP noted in a March 2021 statement, “the mandate is to build a foundation for Peel Regional Police that encompass Strategic objectives and align with the agreed upon recommendations with the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The remedies are built on seven principles to make our Service transparent, accountable, respectful and more human than ever before.”

Among other tasks, this has entailed determining which recommendations are appropriately in-scope, a process that will pave the way for conveying the recommendations to internal stakeholders, such as the Peel Regional Police Association, and external stakeholders across Peel Region, particularly members of racialized communities.

Also, the parties have created a Human Rights Project Charter, which includes processes to track milestones in training, data collection, policy and procedure reviews; onboarding experts in data collection, crisis intervention and de-escalation, and dealing with children in crisis; and forming an Anti-Racism and Human Rights Advisory Committee comprised of highly qualified community members who will provide input on certain aspects of the project.

To further support the Human Rights Project Charter, the Peel Regional Police have retained experts to develop human rights-based data collection methods. Over the next three years, these experts will analyze and report on race-based information. This will include examining a range of police and civilian interactions, such as police stops, arrests and use of force.

 

Media highlights

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Farah Aw-Osman @awosman
Kudos to Peel police and board! Ottawa needs similar approach to root out and dismantle systemic racism. @JimWatsonOttawa @OPSChiefSloly @OntHumanRights

 


Continuing to monitor body-worn cameras

Public interest in police body-worn cameras, and corresponding levels of media coverage, rose considerably in June 2020 following the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, the death of Regis Korchinski-Paquet in Toronto, and the large-scale protests that occurred throughout the summer.

Some of this media coverage referred to the OHRC’s positioning on body-worn cameras. For example, a Toronto Star article published in early June, titled “Why don’t police in Toronto wear body cameras?” stated: “Multiple coroners' inquests into police-involved deaths have called for the devices and, while expressing reservations about privacy implications, the Ontario Human Rights Commission called for a study into the feasibility of equipping every officer in the province with one.”

Based on its Policy on Eliminating Racial Profiling in Law Enforcement, the OHRC is on record as supporting body-worn camera use for front-line officers throughout the province. However, this position should be understood with reference to its October 2020 letter to the Toronto Police Service and Toronto Police Services Board on their policy and procedure on body-worn cameras.

In this letter, the OHRC stated that “for body-worn cameras to support accountability for officer misconduct, procedures around their use must be robust,” and noted that without rigorous monitoring and accountability requirements, “body-worn cameras will be an expensive and perhaps ultimately worthless investment, at a time when communities are calling for defunding and drastic reductions in police budgets.”

Body worn camera implementation projects throughout the province must be situated within robust accountability and monitoring systems which include, but are not limited to:

  • Criteria for when officers must record, and require officers to provide concrete, contemporaneous on-camera justifications for failing to record required events. For example, officers should begin recording at the earliest opportunity, before any contact with a member of the public, whenever that contact is for an investigative or enforcement purpose, and regardless of whether the person is within camera view, unless an exception applies
  • Clear criteria for when cameras must be off, but audio stays on, such as Level 3 and Level 4 strip searches and cavity searches; and in healthcare facilities, unless an exception applies
  • Clear criteria for when cameras should be off, such as at protests, unless officers are directly engaging with protestors
  • Clear criteria for when recording should be stopped
  • Addressing personal privacy concerns by specifically, among other things, protecting categories of vulnerable individuals (e.g., victims of sexual violence, hospitalized individuals) from being recorded without their informed consent. Privacy guidelines should be developed in consultation with the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario.

The OHRC will continue to assess the implications of changing technology and the degree that body-worn cameras are implemented in ways that enhance accountability, while adhering to the Code.

 


Stepping up when criminal background checks discriminate

The OHRC is intervening in the cases of Josslyn Mounsey and Thairu Taban v Metrolinx and Toronto Police Services Board. The applicants in these cases were hired by Metrolinx as dispatchers, but were later dismissed because they did not pass a criminal background check conducted by the Toronto Police Service. Mounsey and Taban, who are Black and who do not have criminal records, allege that they were discriminated against based on their race, contrary to the Code. The OHRC has intervened in the proceedings with the consent of the applicants, to highlight the disproportionate and adverse effects that criminal background checks can have on over-policed communities, and the Code obligations that result in the employment context.

 


Preventing discrimination through police record checks

In March 2021, the OHRC wrote to Ontario’s Solicitor General about proposed changes to the Police Record Checks Reform Act (PCRA). Police databases contain a wide range of information that, when disclosed, may result in people facing unnecessary barriers to employment, volunteering, entering education or a profession, or accessing programs or services. The OHRC welcomed the Ministry’s desire to narrow the scope of exemptions from the PRCRA regime.

Given the disproportionate and unfair impact that police record checks have on vulnerable groups, the OHRC urged Ontario to adopt regulations that limit the scope of any exemption to the PRCRA only in narrow, necessary circumstances. The OHRC further urged Ontario to maintain the Act’s procedural protections for all police record checks, including exempted checks.

For many years, the OHRC has worked to highlight the unfair impact that police record checks have on vulnerable groups. OHRC consultations, public inquiries, research and litigation have highlighted concerns about the disproportionate impact of police record checks on access to employment, housing, education, volunteer activities and other services for people with mental health disabilities and substance addictions, Indigenous people, and Black and other racialized communities and other vulnerable groups. These groups experience systemic discrimination that results in disproportionate contact with the criminal justice system.

Because of the potential for adverse discrimination, the OHRC maintains its long-held position that organizations requesting and using police record checks, and organizations providing the information, must have a bona fide and reasonable basis within the meaning of the Code for doing so. We recommended:

  • Any exemptions be narrowly tailored to make sure that non-criminal information is only released when access to a specific class of information is needed for safety or security concerns related to a specific occupation. Broad, sector-wide exemptions should be rejected. To decide if there is a bona fide need for information beyond what the PRCRA covers, both the specific occupation(s) and the specific non-criminal information being exempted should be clearly identified and assessed
  • Street check information obtained before to Regulation 58/16 under the PRCRA comes into force not be used or disclosed in any circumstances relating to the PRCRA
  • Even where an exemption is in place, the procedural protections available under the PRCRA should apply, including the manner and procedures for requesting, conducting and disclosing police record checks, the consent, correction of record information, and reconsideration processes, and the restrictions on the use of the information, statistics and third-party agreements.

Because of the disproportionate impact of police record checks on vulnerable groups, the OHRC continues to be concerned that the PRCRA does not have provisions to make sure persons or organizations involved in requesting, disclosing or receiving information from a police record check show or confirm it is for a bona fide and reasonable purpose. The OHRC recommended that Ontario consider how the PRCRA might be used or amended to address this concern.

The OHRC also reaffirmed its long-standing call to add a new “police records” ground to the Code, defined as “charges and convictions, with or without a record suspension, and any police records, including records of a person's contact with police.” The OHRC believes this change to the Code, and its recommended changes would better balance social policy goals for public safety, crime prevention, offender rehabilitation, privacy and human rights.

 


OHRC takes Jahn back to the Tribunal

In August 2020, the OHRC filed a motion with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) for an order to hold Ontario accountable for failing to meet its legal obligations to keep prisoners with mental health disabilities out of segregation. This was the latest step in resolving the human rights case of Christina Jahn against Ontario’s Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (MCSCS), which began in 2012.

At the time of her 2011 and 2012 incarcerations at the Ottawa-Carleton Detention Centre, Ms. Jahn was a woman living with mental illness, addictions and cancer. She alleged that she was placed in segregation for the entire period of her incarcerations (approximately 210 days), and experienced brutal and humiliating treatment because of her gender and mental health disabilities.

The OHRC intervened in the case to address the systemic issues that led to Ms. Jahn not receiving appropriate mental health services and being placed in segregation. An additional concern was the fact that women in Ontario’s correctional facilities did not have access to equitable mental health services as compared to incarcerated men.

 

Many steps over the years

In the ensuing years, developments included:

  • A 2013 Jahn v MCSCS settlement agreement that featured a wide range of public interest remedies to address the use of segregation and treatment of prisoners, particularly women, with mental health disabilities in Ontario’s correctional facilities. Ontario also agreed to prohibit the use of segregation for any individuals with mental illness, except as a last resort
  • A 2015 agreement requiring Ontario to provide individuals in segregation with an information handout about their rights
  • A 2017 Contravention of Settlement Application at the HRTO, where the OHRC alleged that Ontario had failed to comply with various remedies set out the earlier agreements, including not meeting its binding commitments to prohibit the use of segregation for people with mental health disabilities, provide mental health screening and services, and accurately document, review and report on the use of segregation
  • A 2018 binding HRTO Consent Order requiring Ontario to comply with the original Jahn public interest remedies and imposing a host of additional measures to ensure effective implementation, including appointing Justice David Cole as an Independent Reviewer to monitor Ontario’s compliance
  • The April 2020 release of Justice Cole’s Final Report, which found that Ontario had still not complied with earlier agreements and orders. Justice Cole made several detailed recommendations, including with respect to human rights data and compliance.

 

The current motion

Following the Independent Reviewer’s report finding that Ontario is still not in compliance, the OHRC filed a motion with the HRTO setting out that Ontario failed to:

  • Ensure that people with mental health disabilities are only placed in segregation as a last resort
  • Conduct adequate mental health screening and reassessment to properly identify people with mental health disabilities in its care
  • Implement a clear definition of segregation based on the internationally-accepted standard of being isolated in a cell for up to 22 hours per day
  • Implement a system to accurately track segregation placements
  • Comply with requirements to conduct internal segregation reviews to make sure that people with mental health disabilities are only placed in segregation as a last resort
  • Develop care plans to provide individualized care to people with mental illness.

The OHRC is asking the HRTO to order a full prohibition on segregation for anyone with a mental health disability, a strict limit on any segregation placement beyond 15 continuous days and 60 total days in a year, and the creation of an independent monitor role to provide oversight of Ontario’s correctional system.

The OHRC is concerned that nearly seven years have passed since the first Jahn settlement, and several years since an extensive independent review was completed, but Ontario is still in breach of its legal obligations, leading to very little change for prisoners with mental health disabilities in Ontario correctional facilities. The OHRC is taking this legal step to make sure that no prisoner is subjected to the unconstitutional harms caused by solitary confinement, that prisoners with mental health disabilities receive the care they require, and that the government is held accountable for meeting its legal obligations to protect people with mental health disabilities in Ontario’s prisons.

 

Media highlights

 


Francis shifts the bar for segregation in Ontario

After decisions in Francis v Ontario from the Ontario Superior Court and Court of Appeal for Ontario this past year, the law in Ontario is now clear: using segregation for any prisoner for longer than 15 days – or for any prisoner with serious mental illness at all – is cruel and unusual treatment, contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Francis was a class action case about two groups of people who were put in segregation in Ontario’s prisons from April 2015 to September 2018:

  • People who were in segregation for more than 15 days (prolonged segregation)
  • Anyone with a serious mental illness who was put in segregation at all.

These groups argued that this had breached their s. 7 (life, liberty and security of the person) and s. 12 (cruel and unusual punishment) Charter rights and sought damages.

In April 2020, the Ontario Superior Court found that Ontario had violated the prisoners’ Charter rights, and awarded the class $30 million in Charter damages. In reaching its decision, the Court relied on, among other things, the OHRC’s extensive efforts to get Ontario to change its segregation practices and Ontario’s failure to implement the Jahn settlement.

Ontario appealed the decision, and the OHRC was granted leave to intervene in the appeal, which was heard in December 2020. In its intervention, the OHRC argued that Charter damages were an appropriate remedy in this case, and that such an award would not interfere with the “good governance” of Ontario’s prisons. The OHRC's submissions also highlighted our extensive work in this area, particularly in the Jahn case.

In March 2021, the Court of Appeal dismissed the province’s appeal, confirming that:

  • Placing prisoners with serious mental Illness in segregation violated the Charter sections 7 (life, liberty and security of the person) and 12 (cruel and unusual punishment) rights of class members
  • Placing any prisoner in segregation for more than 15 consecutive days violated sections 7 and 12 of the Charter
  • The absence of a timely independent review process for segregation placements violated class members section 7 Charter rights.

The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision to award $30 million in Charter damages, and also upheld the lower court’s finding that the claims in negligence were not barred by the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, 2019.

The Court of Appeal’s reasons for rejecting Ontario’s appeal were consistent with the OHRC’s submissions, particularly on the Charter damages claim. Also, in setting out the context for the appeal, the Court recognized that while Ontario had made some changes to the segregation system as a result of the public interest remedies set out in the Jahn consent order, the Independent Expert appointed through that process had documented Ontario’s failure to comply with many of its own policies.

Francis is a pivotal decision about Ontario’s segregation practices, and shows that the government must act now to prevent the unconstitutional treatment of prisoners – and to prevent harm before it occurs.

The OHRC’s work contributed to this important development, and we will push for it to translate to real change on the ground

 

Media highlight

 

Poverty

Calling for an Ontario poverty reduction strategy with hard targets, permanent solutions

In April 2020, the OHRC made a submission to the government’s consultation on Ontario’s next Poverty Reduction Strategy, calling for a human rights-based approach by entrenching economic and social responses to COVID-19 as permanent solutions.

Poverty and systemic discrimination are interconnected and produce compounding effects. Certain groups identified by grounds in Ontario’s Human Rights Code disproportionately experience poverty together with poorer health and food security, lower education, precarious low-wage work, disproportionate contact with the criminal justice system, higher risk of homelessness and other forms of social and economic inequality. Particularly affected are women (especially single mothers and older women), Indigenous peoples, racialized communities including newcomers, persons with disabilities, adults living alone and other populations.

Social and economic crises, such as the current health pandemic, worsen existing inequalities, making people more vulnerable to discrimination. Poorer response for vulnerable groups undermines everyone’s well-being.

The OHRC made several recommendations for Ontario’s next Poverty Reduction Strategy including:

  • Recognizing the right to an adequate standard of living
  • Adding protection for social and economic disadvantage to Ontario’s Human Rights Code
  • Setting poverty reduction targets for Ontario that align with federal targets
  • Breaking down poverty-related data by disadvantaged populations
  • Recognizing that poverty reduction includes good health
  • Amending the Poverty Reduction Act to provide for robust independent monitoring of Ontario’s strategy
  • Developing an Indigenous-specific strategy in partnership with Indigenous communities
  • Committing to permanent solutions to poverty, like a guaranteed universal basic income
  • Monitoring data to avoid COVID-19 resurgence and other negative social and economic outcomes for vulnerable groups.

In December 2020, Ontario released its new Poverty Reduction Strategy and the OHRC wrote back raising serious concerns. While the OHRC supports the government’s goal to help people leave social assistance and find stable employment, the strategy does not address some of the more complex and intersecting reasons that lead people to need social assistance. The OHRC recommended that the government should:

  • Commit to measures that support low-income workers such as health benefits, paid sick days and portable housing supports
  • Set a specific target that aligns with or exceeds the federal target of a 20% reduction in poverty by 2020 and a 50% reduction by 2030
  • Set an additional target to eliminate deep poverty within five years
  • Annually report data on the proportion of the population that experiences chronic homelessness, unmet health needs, food insecurity, lack of literacy, minimum wage and low-paid work, broken down by disadvantaged groups
  • Regularly consult people with lived experience or heightened risk of poverty to guide implementing the strategy.

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Erin Caton @erin
This is a really good document. Part of poverty for disabled people is the inequity in accessible housing availability, which isn’t covered, but this is a great start. #ONpoli #CanadaRecovery

 

Making an intersectional analysis of poverty

In August 2020, the OHRC wrote to Associate Chief Justice Frank N. Marrocco, the Chair of the Independent Long-Term Care COVID-19 Commission (LTC Commission) to stress the importance of human rights principles. The OHRC emphasized that many residents and staff risk experiencing unique, intersectional forms of discrimination because they identify with more than one Code ground. The OHRC highlighted that personal support workers (PSWs) who work at long-term care facilities are often racialized and/or newcomer women, who face compounded challenges. PSWs often endure precarious and low-wage contract employment necessitating multiple jobs, while facing barriers in having their nursing or other credentials from abroad recognized in Ontario. The OHRC encouraged the LTC Commission to consider the various intersectional human rights characteristics, discriminatory conditions and systemic structural forces that may be at play.

 


Tribunal decision removes roadblock to employment for refugees

In a significant decision, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) found that Convention refugees should not face discriminatory barriers to accessing employment and contributing fully to Ontario society.

Mr. Shyesh Al-Turki, a Syrian refugee, filed a claim at the HRTO alleging that Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation (MTO) allows certain foreign-licensed drivers to have their foreign driving experience credited in Ontario’s graduated licensing system if they get documentation from their originating countries, which refugees cannot produce. This requirement has forced many refugees, including Mr. Al-Turki, to wait a year before taking the road test to get their full Ontario licence. This has created a barrier to finding employment by eliminating their options for working as drivers, and has often forced them to remain on social assistance and pay higher car insurance premiums.

The OHRC intervened in Al-Turki v Ontario (Transportation), and the HRTO relied on our arguments and evidence in finding that Ontario’s driver’s licensing policy:

  • Discriminates against refugees based on place of origin, citizenship and ethnic origin
  • Perpetuates disadvantage by imposing requirements based on conditions in the refugees’ home countries rather than individual merits
  • Exacerbates the already disadvantaged position of refugees by making it challenging to get their full driver’s licences in a timely manner 
  • Feeds into stereotypes that refugees cannot be trusted, enter Canada on false pretenses, and if they can’t find employment and remain on public assistance, are a “financial burden” for society.

In reaching its decision, the HRTO agreed with the OHRC position that the current driver’s licence policy is arbitrary and perpetuates historical disadvantage against refugees who are often poor, vulnerable and marginalized. It ordered the MTO to immediately stop requiring refugees to get state authentication of their driving experience, and to develop and publicize a new non-discriminatory policy in accordance with the principles in the decision within six months of the COVID-19 Emergency Order ending.

This HRTO decision will allow refugees to obtain a full driver’s licence without discrimination and have earlier eligibility for jobs in trucking, ride-sharing and delivery services. The OHRC calls on the Ontario government to ensure it identifies and removes all discriminatory barriers that prevent refugees from contributing fully to Ontario society, and is monitoring the implementation of the remedy in this case.

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Shanifa Nasser @shanifanasser
Ontario's human rights tribunal has removed a roadblock that required many refugees to wait one year before taking a driving test, keeping them from finding employment as drivers, and often forcing them to stay on social assistance longer.

 


Making sure poverty is not a crime

Laws that criminalize people who are poor for simply trying to survive have no place in Ontario. That’s why the OHRC is seeking to intervene in Fair Change v Ontario, a constitutional challenge to the Safe Streets Act being heard by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. The Safe Streets Act allows the police to ticket people for panhandling in certain circumstances.

The OHRC asked to intervene because the Safe Streets Act disproportionately affects people protected under the Ontario Human Rights Code and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms who are either street-involved or homeless. Code-protected groups experience poverty at higher rates. These groups include First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples, racialized people, persons living with mental health disabilities and/or addictions, women, and LGBTQ2+ youth.

If the Court permits the OHRC to intervene, we will argue that the Safe Streets Act violates equality rights and international law guarantees and cannot be justified as a reasonable limit on rights.

The OHRC previously advocated to repeal this Act. In June 2017, we wrote a letter to the Attorney General expressing concerns that the Act contributes to the stigma and disadvantage of homeless and street-involved people. It subjects this population to greater police surveillance, portrays them as criminal, a nuisance or dangerous, and as people to be feared by the public.

The impact of this law is harsh and broad. Many people who are ticketed accumulate fines that they are unable to pay because of poverty, which then entraps them in a cycle of repeated exposure to law enforcement and the criminal justice system. Some face imprisonment which, along with loss of liberty and other negative effects, results in them losing their social assistance and potentially their housing. This prevents people from transitioning out of street-involved life because significant outstanding fines and/or records of conviction pose barriers to securing housing or employment or committing to mental health and/or addiction treatment.

The COVID-19 pandemic is exacerbating existing inequalities. The need to remove barriers for the most vulnerable people and to focus on solutions is long overdue. Such an approach is required to respect the rights of the people living with the highest poverty levels, and to make sure that all Ontarians can reach their full potential.

 


New call for accessible housing

For over a decade, the OHRC has stressed that housing providers are not solely responsible for respecting the right to accessibility. All levels of government, community planners and housing developers must promote disability rights by committing to universal design for any new housing construction. Accessible housing is not a panacea for eliminating discrimination against people with disabilities – instead, it is a critical step toward facilitating safety, security and independence.

In October 2020, the Chief Commissioner met with members of the Accessible Housing Network, to hear long-standing concerns about the lack of accessible housing in Ontario.

On November 22, National Housing Day, the Chief Commissioner wrote a statement that spotlighted the need for safe housing because Ontarians with disabilities have always lived with the harsh reality that their housing choices are extremely limited, chronically inaccessible and often substandard and unsafe.

The statement drew attention to how Ontarians with disabilities routinely face discriminatory screening practices by landlords and blanket refusals to retrofit accessibility features when accommodation needs arise. The statement also highlighted how people with disabilities are regularly forced to file legal claims simply to get landlords to remove barriers and build safer environments.

Following the National Housing Day statement, the Chief Commissioner corresponded with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on his commentary about the need for a greater mix in the supply of affordable housing. The Chief Commissioner noted the important need for affordable housing, particularly given the current housing crisis, and urged the Minister to take a human rights-based approach to the issues and make sure that Ontarians can secure both affordable and accessible housing.

The OHRC called on the government to amend Ontario’s Building Code Regulation to require all units in new construction or major renovation of multi-unit residences to fully meet universal accessibility standards. We also called on municipalities to prioritize universal design construction, consistent with their obligations under the Code. As well, we called on government and housing providers to work together to make sure that new developments are fully inclusive.

In his reply to the Chief Commissioner, the Minister noted that provinces and territories across Canada have committed to furthering the cross-country harmonization of technical requirements in construction codes. He also said that his Ministry would share the OHRC’s recommendations with the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC) for consideration for adoption in the National Construction Codes. The Minister invited the OHRC to work with the Ministry’s Director of the Building and Development Branch to promote accessibility proposals with the Ministry and the CCBFC.

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Thea Kurdi ♿ @tkurdi
This is great news! There's nothing more #sustainable than #accessibility. #Visitable #adaptable #AccessibleHousing also helps our mental health initiatives as well as our #CRPD & #SDGs commitments. It also helps reduce pressure on LTC homes and #AgeInPlace options for all.

 


Direct payment rental agreements an issue in Sudbury

In a quote in a report on the Elliot Lake Today website, the President of the Greater Sudbury Landlord Association (GSLA) drew attention to landlords in Sudbury refusing to rent during the COVID-19 pandemic to people receiving Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) and Ontario Works (OW) benefits who do not agree to arrangements where ODSP and OW pay the landlords directly.

In July 2020, the OHRC wrote to the mayor of Greater Sudbury and the Greater Sudbury Landlord Association highlighting that these payment arrangements are considered voluntary unless an existing tenant/client is in arrears, and if that is the case, pay-direct arrangements should always be made in consultation with the tenant/client.

Given the vulnerability of tenants during the COVID-19 pandemic, the OHRC also reminded them of their human rights obligations relating to rental housing, as the housing service manager and OW administrator.

Under the Code, everyone has the right to equal treatment in housing, and landlords are responsible for making sure housing environments are free from discrimination and harassment. People cannot be refused an apartment, harassed by a housing provider or other tenants, or otherwise treated unfairly because of Code grounds, including the receipt of public assistance like ODSP and OW. The OHRC stressed that housing providers should adopt an individualized approach to implementing such an arrangement, and be mindful of a situation where a tenant’s circumstances may require flexibility.

The OHRC also talked about the importance of making sure that rental housing organizational rules, policies, procedures, decision-making processes and culture do not serve as barriers and do not have a discriminatory impact.

 

Media highlight

 


Adding our voice against an anti-loitering bylaw in Kenora

In July 2020, the OHRC learned that Kenora City Council was considering a proposed anti-loitering by-law. The bylaw would have given police the power to fine anyone loitering on public property $100, and would have likely disproportionally targeted people experiencing homelessness and addiction issues. Many of the most vulnerable people are Indigenous.

The OHRC joined the chorus of Grand Council Treaty #3 (GCT3), Nishnawbe Aski Nation (NAN) and other voices from the community by writing a public letter denouncing the proposed bylaw and encouraging the City of Kenora to work with local leaders to develop solutions that put the needs of Kenora’s vulnerable and marginalized population at the centre of decision-making. The OHRC also emphasized that an anti-loitering bylaw will not solve a homelessness crisis. What is instead required is real systemic change, such as increased housing and social supports developed in consultation with local service providers, Indigenous organizations and First Nations, with financial supports from higher levels of government.

The OHRC’s letter drew from our earlier work in Kenora – the 2019 Report and recommendations on homelessness in Kenora. This report said:

Perhaps most importantly, there needs to be a culture shift in terms of how leaders and service providers understand and meet the needs of marginalized and vulnerable people who call Kenora home. It must start with accepting that all people are welcome in Kenora, and that all people are entitled to basic dignity and respect. At minimum, it requires understanding and accepting their lived experiences and developing solutions that put their needs at the centre of decision-making. Homelessness and addiction are difficult social problems, but they must be addressed directly and honestly. They cannot and will not be solved by pushing vulnerable people out of sight.

In July 2020, Kenora City Council overwhelmingly rejected the bylaw.

 

Media highlights

 


Addressing discrimination in a federal community housing program

In October 2020, a community legal clinic in York region approached the OHRC with concerns of discrimination against recipients of social assistance living in co-operative housing that was receiving funding from the new Federal Community Housing Initiative – phase 2 (FCHI-2). The federal program had been designed in such a way that people who received Ontario Works (OW) or Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) where paying over and above their housing allowance on rent and housing related expenses. This was in violation of OW and ODSP rules and forcing social assistance recipients to use money on housing that would otherwise go to other essentials like food.

The OHRC reached out to the Housing Advocate's Office at the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) to propose collaborative action. In December 2020, the OHRC and the CHRC wrote a joint letter to the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), the program administrator, highlighting the concerns with how the FCHI-2 was affecting people receiving social assistance.

In March 2021, CMHC wrote back to the OHRC and CHRC to share changes that they had made to the FCHI-2 program to address the concerns. As of May 2021, people receiving social assistance would no longer be required to pay more than their OW and ODSP housing allowances towards rent and other housing related costs.  

This collaboration with the CHRC led to direct changes on the ground and will have a positive impact on the lives of many people who receive social assistance.

 


Poverty Advisory Group adds community focus to poverty work

In May 2020, the OHRC held its third Poverty Advisory Group (PAG) meeting. The OHRC shared updates on its COVID-19 work, poverty-related litigation in Fulton v Guan and Al-Turki v Ontario, as well as early thinking on an inquiry into poverty and human rights. Members shared insights into the concerning link between COVID-19 and poverty, and provided feedback on a possible OHRC inquiry.

At the fourth meeting, held in October 2020, members provided insight into COVID-19 and expressed diverse views on the OHRC’s revised proposal for an inquiry into social condition, COVID-19 and human rights. The proposal has since been revised and has received approval from OHRC Commissioners. In the coming months, staff will continue to seek guidance from advisory group members and plans to launch an initiative later this year.

Introducing the Poverty Advisory Group

  • Ena Chadha (Chair), OHRC
  • Mike Creek, Working for Change
  • Rhonda Huneault, Tungasuvvingat Inuit
  • Michael Kerr, Colour of Poverty – Colour of Change
  • Elisabeth McIsaac and Nevena Dragicevic, Maytree
  • Kwame McKenzie, Wellesley Institute
  • David McKillop, Legal Aid Ontario
  • Wendy Porch, Centre for Independent Living in Toronto
  • Bruce Porter, Social Rights Advocacy Centre
  • Jasmine Rezaee, YWCA Toronto
  • Douglas Varrette, Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto

Education

Right to Read inquiry moves forward

The OHRC has made solid progress on its Right to Read inquiry into human rights issues that affect students with reading disabilities in Ontario’s public education system. The evidence-gathering phase is now complete, and the inquiry team is analyzing the large amount of data, information and documents received and drafting a final report.

 

Collecting information and data

The inquiry team has received and is analyzing documents, data and information from the eight representative Ontario English language public school boards and the Ministry of Education (MOE), and has asked questions and done follow-up interviews where needed. We extend our appreciation to the school boards and MOE, given the challenges they faced with COVID-19 and other issues.

We have also received and reviewed documents, data and information from Ontario’s 13 English-language public faculties of education.

 

Connecting with the public

The OHRC used various ways to get public input. For example, 1,425 students, parents and guardians completed an online survey and shared their experiences with learning to read and the impact on themselves and their families. As well, over 1,760 educators (teachers, teacher candidates, special education teachers, school and board administrators), private tutors and other professionals (such as Speech-Language Pathologists, psychologists and pediatricians) completed a survey targeted to educators.

The inquiry has also received over 1,000 telephone calls or emails, and many more engagements through social media. Also, 20 organizations representing a variety of perspectives made written submissions.

The OHRC hosted four public hearings – in Brampton, London, Thunder Bay and Ottawa. At each public hearing, up to 20 speakers or groups of speakers shared their experiences. We heard from students, families, educators, service providers (such as private tutors and a child welfare agency), and other professionals. Over 600 people attended the hearings. All but the Brampton hearing were live streamed, and all hearings are archived on the OHRC’s YouTube channel.

As well, 25 people attended a public meeting in Kenora. Unfortunately, we were unable to host planned meetings in Barrie and Hamilton due to the Emergency Order prohibiting public gatherings due to COVID-19.

The OHRC held First Nations, Métis and Inuit (FNMI) engagements. We held listening circles at the London, Thunder Bay and Kenora Indigenous Friendship Centres, and met with representatives of the Métis Nation of Ontario and an Inuit organization in Ottawa. Further FNMI engagements planned for Barrie and Hamilton could not take place due to the pandemic.

 

Expert assistance, research

The OHRC continues to work with Dr. Linda Siegel and Dr. Jamie Metsala, who are both experts on reading disabilities, to assist with the inquiry and analyze the information received. We have also conducted extensive research to understand scientific research and best practices in other jurisdictions.

 

Looking at COVID-19 and education

Unprecedented closures of schools and shifts to online learning have been difficult for all students. The OHRC has heard from stakeholders that students with special education needs and other vulnerabilities have experienced unique and compounded challenges, that their circumstances have not consistently been considered and addressed, and as a result they have fallen even further behind than their peers.

Some specific concerns have been raised in the context of the Right to Read inquiry. We have also heard from members of the OHRC’s Education Advisory Group, as well as from disability rights organizations. 

The OHRC wrote to the Ministry of Education and school boards, calling on them to establish plans and programs to systematically and consistently address the needs of students with disabilities for the 2020–21 school year. The letter included concerns and recommendations related to:

  • Technology
  • Personal contact
  • Professional services
  • Screening and assessment
  • Instruction
  • Specialized programming
  • Identification, Placement, and Review Committees (IPRCs) and Individual Education Plans (IEPs) and the duty to accommodate
  • Summer learning programs
  • Shared legal responsibility.

 

Working with the Ministry of Education

In December 2020, the Chief Commissioner met with the Minister of Education to discuss these issues and potential recommendations stemming from the Right to Read Public Inquiry. During the meeting, the Chief Commissioner also raised the need to work with the Ontario College of Teachers to explore the possibility of requiring anti-racism training as a component of certification. The Minister was receptive to this suggestion.

The inquiry team continues to have discussions with senior staff at the MOE. We have shared information about our research, what we have been learning in the inquiry and potential recommendations. We will continue to engage with the MOE and encourage the MOE to address concerns arising from the inquiry.

 

Next steps

The inquiry team is currently analyzing the information received and drafting the final report. This report will address concerns with how Ontario’s public education system meets the needs of students with reading disabilities or at risk for these disabilities in areas such as curriculum and teaching, early screening, reading interventions, accommodations and psycho-educational assessments. The inquiry’s findings will also help other students (low-income, racialized, FNMI, newcomer, English Language Learners, other disabilities etc.) who are not realizing equitable opportunities to succeed.

COVID-19 and other factors have delayed some elements of the inquiry. A final inquiry report, which will include detailed findings and recommendations for government and education stakeholders, is now planned for release later this year.

 

Watch the Right to Read update video

The OHRC has produced a five-minute video, Right to Read: an inquiry snapshot, which offers an update on our progress and features several of the speakers from our public hearings. As well, the public hearings are included on the OHRC YouTube channel.

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Emily Moorhead @moorhead_emily
Of all the things about the inquiry process, what struck me most was that every story was as much the same as it was different. Over and over: families, children, teens, parents, students pleading, discouraged, longing for the right to read (and to be taught how!) It’s time.

 

DecodingDyslexiaON @dyslexiaON
Weekly we hear of current public school experiences. Yet public education should know better since the evidence has been available for decades. Hopefully the OHRC Right to Read Inquiry’s Report and findings will be the change catalyst that Ontario (and Canada) needs.

 

Alicia Smith @AliciaFromTiny
Thank you for conducting the #RightToRead public inquiry, the work is ongoing but the results are already starting to be felt. #scienceofreading @Sflecce

 


Working with government on existing, emerging education issues

The challenges of the pandemic, including the unprecedented closure of schools, have been difficult for all students. Since April 2020, the OHRC has met several times with education stakeholders to discuss urgent needs of students from Code-protected groups, especially students with disabilities. These discussions led the OHRC to send two substantial letters to the Minister of Education outlining a range of concerns on school closures, virtual learning and return-to-school plans. Drawing from the OHRC’s principles and actions documents along with stakeholder feedback, the letters provided specific guidance on:

  • The need to establish a return-to-school partnership table
  • Obligations under the Code for students with disabilities experiencing barriers to virtual learning and potential barriers resulting from modified classrooms in the 2020–21 school year.

 


Adding a mandatory human rights lens in education

In spring 2021, Ontario’s Ministry of Education launched a mandatory online professional learning program for over 200,000 teachers and school administrators across Ontario – and the OHRC was pleased to contribute to this important initiative.

Human rights, anti-racism, anti-discrimination and anti-colonial education, a four-part, year-long program, is designed to promote dialogue and reflection about human rights, anti-discrimination, anti-colonial education, and confronting anti-Indigenous and anti-Black racism.

The goal of this series is to equip educators and school boards to address and prevent discrimination based on all Code grounds, and to dismantle the systemic barriers that hamper some students’ opportunities to learn and thrive. The sessions are intended to build awareness of what racism and discrimination looks like in teaching, classrooms and schools, and to respond in ways that are decolonized and culturally relevant.

The OHRC’s Chief Commissioner recorded a video segment to introduce the importance of human rights in education.

Here are some highlights of the Chief Commissioner’s presentation:

Teachers are the key to providing a learning environment that fosters human rights. Your teaching, role modeling, expectations and attitudes have a direct impact on students’ self-esteem, sense of security, academic performance and social integration. Most importantly, you teach students how they should be treated, and how they should treat others.

A learning environment that promotes and protects human rights…

  • Has curriculum and materials where all students can see themselves represented and celebrated
  • Has educators, administrators and staff who reflect the community and authentically welcome the community
  • Is designed from the ground up to be accessible to students with a range of abilities and needs
  • Ensures that each student learns about respect, tolerance and human rights, and takes this learning into the wider community.

Only with these systems in place can we achieve the outcomes every student has a right to – to be treated fairly, to be supported and to reach their highest potential.

Education is the lifeblood for building – and sustaining – a culture of human rights. Schools are the best places for human rights learning to begin, and we know the earlier the better. We need to lay the groundwork as early as possible to build positive messages and images to counter social media rife with racism, misogyny and homophobia.

Most importantly, what students learn and experience through their education shapes their perceptions and expectations of all other government systems, so it is imperative that our schools model the kind of society we want to live in.

The Chief Commissioner acknowledged and thanked all the individuals and groups, including educators, administrators and families, for their support of human rights, and especially the Ministry of Education, who launched this training to promote our shared vision of a respectful, equitable and vibrant school system.

The Chief Commissioner concluded her remarks by talking about how our children’s futures – and the heart of our society – depend on getting the right start. She then quoted the world's youngest Nobel Laureate, Malala Yousafzai: “One child, one teacher, one book, one pen can change the world.”

 


Teaching human rights in Grade 10 Civics and Citizenship classes

Teaching Human Rights in Ontario: a guide for Ontario schools (2013) is one of the OHRC’ most popular resources. This year, we worked on developing a new curriculum support product for the mandatory Grade 10 Civics and Citizenship classes. This update includes several new scenarios based on actual cases, and student activities that are based on the Code. The OHRC partnered with the Ontario Justice Education Network to develop the lesson plans. Teachers from across the province as well as members of the OHRC’s Education Advisory Group also provided input on the plans, which will be released later in 2021.

The lesson plans are linked with Teaching Human Rights in Ontario, which provides activities, quizzes, fact sheets, case studies and discussion questions related to the Code to support high school education.

Teaching Human Rights in Ontario is available online in PDF format.

 


Providing guidance to the Peel School Board Review

In June 2020, the OHRC wrote to the Minister of Education to acknowledge the steps his Ministry had taken on its review of the Peel District School Board (PDSB) in response to growing concerns about systemic discrimination, anti-Black racism, discord among senior leadership, and issues of governance. The OHRC also outlined our concerns with the lack of action by the PDSB to address many of the systemic issues and statistical disparities faced by Black students. For example:

  • Black students represent 10.2% of the secondary school population, but approximately 22.5% of students receiving suspensions
  • Only 7.7% of Black secondary school students are enrolled in academic courses; while 21.7% are enrolled in applied courses and 25.4% in the locally developed credit course stream
  • Between 2013 and 2019, the PDSB recorded 52 suspensions at the junior kindergarten level and 103 at the senior kindergarten level.

The OHRC also stressed that community members have expressed serious concern for the plight of Black students across Ontario, and that Black students in Ontario’s urban centres and suburban communities face many of the same concerns about systemic and anti-Black racism that were cited in the PDSB review.

The OHRC also wrote about the vital need to make improving the well-being of Black students in Ontario a priority, and we offered to share our expertise in addressing issues of this nature, and to work with the Ministry to make sure that future recommendations provide redress for the historic experiences of Black students who faced systemic discrimination in the education system.

The OHRC met with the PDSB in March 2021, and we learned that the board has a working draft of a proposed anti-racism policy and plans to conduct community consultations on the policy. The OHRC will take a close look at the PDSB’s steps so far, and continue to provide whatever help it can in the next stages.

In July 2020, the Peel Regional Police (PRP) School Resource Officer Program was put on pause in response to concerns – particularly from Black and other racialized community members – that the presence of officers in schools led to over-surveillance and criminalization. The pause was intended to create meaningful dialogue with diverse stakeholders and to consult with community members.

The OHRC took part in the consultation committee that included racialized community groups, child and youth organizations and other key stakeholders. The OHRC highlighted the need to be sensitive to the lived experience of racialized students as a priority concern in assessing the program. In November 2020, following the consultations, the PRP announced it would cancel the program in response to community concerns. The OHRC has encouraged the PRP to consult with the Ministry of Education's Education Equity Secretariat when considering future police engagement with the education system.

 


Looking at youth mental health in education

In the summer of 2020, the Chief Commissioner supported the Investigative Journalism Bureau’s extensive reporting on the youth mental health crisis. The Investigative Journalism Bureau, a newsroom with the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health and the Toronto Star, launched an in-depth series called “Generation Distress,” examining how academic institutions treat students with mental health disabilities. The investigation collected data on mental health appointments, wait times, budgets, accommodation policies and student suicides. With a particular focus on mental health disabilities in post-secondary education and the duty to accommodate, the Chief Commissioner provided the investigation team with advice on human rights principles and the duty of education providers to accommodate mental health needs, the problematic aspects of mandated absence policies, and the human rights analysis of who must bear the cost of medical documentation. The Generation Distress series was nominated for the prestigious CJF Jackman Award for Excellence in Journalism, which honours exceptional reporting in the public interest.

 


Education Advisory Group continues to guide us

After being created in November 2019, 14 community representatives joined the OHRC’s Education Advisory Group (EDAG). Each group member has substantive knowledge of education issues, and is providing ongoing feedback and guidance on priority education issues and projects.

The kick-off meeting planned for March 2020 was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and an initial virtual meeting was convened in May. In this first meeting, discussion focused on racism in education and the OHRC’s curriculum development work for Grade 10/11 Civics and Citizenship courses.

After four months of school closures, a second meeting was organized in June 2020 to gain input on pressing COVID-related concerns in the education sector, especially the needs of students with disabilities, vulnerable students lacking technology to support online learning, the needs of Indigenous students and student mental health.

In August 2020, the advisory group identified concerns about the re-opening of schools in September, which helped the OHRC draft two substantial letters to the Ministry of Education. As well, the Chief Commissioner met with the Minister of Education to discuss COVID-19 related concerns along with the OHRC’s Right to Read public inquiry recommendations.

At the third meeting in September 2020, the group focused on racism in education, the unique needs of Indigenous learners, and ongoing COVID-19 concerns. The advisory group also provided input to the Ministry of Education’s Education Equity Secretariat’s alternative dispute resolution mechanism for Indigenous students.

Future discussions will focus on human rights concerns with the School Resource Officer Program, and the impact of the OHRC’s letter to universities and colleges on racism and other human rights concerns in response to a series of high-profile racist incidents on various campuses.

In each of these cases, the Education Advisory Group is a critical resource on key human rights issues in education.

 

Introducing the Education Advisory Group

  • Lindy Amato, Ontario Teachers Federation
  • Patrick Case, Education Equity Secretariat, Ministry of Education
  • Amy Cooper, Equitas
  • Jim Costello, Council of Ontario Directors of Education
  • Rachel da Silveira Gorman, Critical Disability Studies, York University
  • Hina Ghaus, ARCH Disability Law Centre
  • Josh Hill, Ontario Student Trustee Association
  • Dr. Carl James, Faculty of Education, York University
  • Annie Kidder, People for Education
  • Justine Mackay, Ontario Student Trustee Association
  • Jessica Reekie, Ontario Justice Education Network
  • Cecil Roach, York Region District School Board
  • Jodie Williams, First Nations, Métis & Inuit Education Association of Ontario
  • Lynn Ziraldo, K–12 Education Standards Development Committee

Identifying, eliminating anti-Black and other racism

Continuing to call out Anti-Black racism

For several years, identifying and addressing anti-Black racism has been a key OHRC priority, and 2020–21 was no exception. This annual report describes the many steps the OHRC has taken over the past year to continue to call out and address systemic anti-Black racism. The magnitude of the fight against systemic racism is evident in the fact that OHRC’s efforts have targeted anti-Black racism in policing, in the courts and corrections, in health care, in elementary and post-secondary education, in housing and in many other areas where it continues to harm Black people and communities across Ontario.

Anti-Black racism received more media attention following the summer of 2020, as protests against police violence swept across the United States and Canada after the death of George Floyd. In this outpouring of concern, local Black communities identified the pervasiveness of anti-Black racism in all regions and sectors of Ontario. The OHRC issued a statement, titled OHRC confronts and condemns anti-Black racism, where it reaffirmed that it stands with Black communities in Ontario to call out and eliminate the racism and discrimination that is causing so much harm.

In August 2020, the OHRC released A Disparate Impact, the second interim report in its inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service (TPS). This report confirmed that Black people were more likely than others to be arrested, charged, over-charged, struck, shot or killed by Toronto police. At the launch, the Chief Commissioner said, “the time for debate about whether anti-Black bias exists is over. The OHRC calls on the TPS, TPSB, the City of Toronto and the Government of Ontario to take immediate action to address systemic and anti-Black racism in policing and to respect and protect racialized people in Toronto.”

 


Calling out racism in post-secondary education

OHRC concerns about anti-Black racism also apply to the domain of post-secondary education. In response to a series of high-profile racist incidents on various campuses, the OHRC wrote a letter to universities and colleges on racism and other human rights concerns. Released in December 2020, the letter listed and condemned actions and inactions that perpetuate racism – including anti-Black racism. It also affirmed that the legal and practical responsibility for examining the conditions, challenges and impediments to a respectful learning environment lies in the hands of senior administrators and their human rights advisors.

The Chief Commissioner requested that all colleges and universities in Ontario commit to take proactive action and create equitable and inclusive education environments. The OHRC is now reviewing and analyzing responses from the various colleges and universities to track best practices and gaps and will issue a further statement based on information reported by the institutions.

In March 2021, the Chief Commissioner authored an opinion editorial published online by TVO, titled Students should not have to educate educators about racism. She wrote that universities and colleges must take a hard and unflinching look at the ways their policies, practices and attitudes perpetuate discrimination. She noted that academic institutions must promote a culture of equity and inclusion by embedding comprehensive and effective anti-racism and anti-colonial initiatives in all areas and at all levels of their institutions. Students experience overt and systemic racism in their curriculum, lectures, evaluations, residences and campus life, as well as through financial barriers. Institutional racism undermines hiring, promotion and tenure procedures and permeates administrative and governance policies. The Chief Commissioner identified that one serious omission contributing to the problem is the absence of data documenting the racial diversity of students in post-secondary education.

 

Media highlights

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Natasha Daley @NatashaDaley_
When the Ontario Human Rights Commission drafts an open letter: Anti-Black racism within academic institutions is not a matter that should ever be taken lightly.

 


Taking a year-round view of Black History Month

Every February, the OHRC celebrates Black History Month. This year’s theme was “Honouring the past, inspiring the future.” Using social media, the OHRC highlighted Black Ontarian change-makers such as Dr. Daniel G Hill, Rosemary Brown and Bromley Armstrong, all of whom shaped human rights work at the OHRC and Ontario at large. Social media posts focused on their fervent fight against racism and discrimination, recounting captivating stories such as the time Bromley Armstrong, a civil rights leader, challenged segregation in Dresden, Ontario in the early 1950s before helping to establish the OHRC in 1961.

In a statement posted to the OHRC’s website, the Chief Commissioner emphasized the importance of celebrating the historical achievements of Black Ontarians not just one month of the year, but every day. She went on to express her gratitude towards members of the OHRC’s Community Advisory Group, and government and public leaders, who continue to call out and actively work to end anti-Black racism. As the OHRC continues to work towards the equitable society envisioned in Ontario’s Human Rights Code, our hope is to bring focus and increased awareness of race issues and systemic inequalities. Black history matters, now more than ever.

 


Launching a new program to combat hate

In October 2020, Chief Commissioner Chadha issued a statement titled “A critical juncture of hate” describing how Canada is facing two pandemics – COVID-19 and the pandemic of brazen hate, extremism and brutality. She urged that to promote a culture of compassion and human rights, everyone is responsible for speaking out against discrimination and harassment, and drew attention to the OHRC’s 30-minute interactive eCourse, Call it out: racism, racial discrimination and human rights. The Chief Commissioner emphasized that we all need to remain vigilant against the open hate and insidious racism that has engulfed our society, so we come out on the other side of this pandemic with our humanity intact. She called on all members of society to champion equality and dignity, monitor our human rights temperature as Canadians, and refuse to be fatigued by COVID-19 in our fight to combat racism and condemn hate.

Inspired by this message, the Investigative Journalism Bureau (a collection of media and academic organizations, including the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Humber College StoryLab, Toronto Star and the National Observer) invited the OHRC to collaborate on an anti-hate project to examine escalating incidents of hate in the pandemic. Through this initiative, the OHRC is providing its expertise on human rights, engaging with community groups and police services to take action against increasing anti-Asian hate and discrimination.

In January 2021, the Chief Commissioner presented a lecture to journalism students on the differences between racism, harassment, criminal hate and cyber hate.

In its work with the Bureau, the OHRC continues to advocate for stronger hate protections, and to promote a culture of compassion and human rights accountability in Ontario.

Foundational strengths

Community engagement a cornerstone of pandemic response

Community engagement is a cornerstone of the OHRC’s work. Tapping into the lived experiences of the people and communities across Ontario keeps our finger on the pulse of emerging human rights issues, allows us to target our resources and efforts to where they are most needed, and provides us with feedback on our own progress. This has never been more critical than in the past year.

In our Strategic Plan, the OHRC made an explicit commitment to make sure community engagement is the starting point for action. This commitment led us to establish, pursuant to s. 31.5 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, a series of advisory groups to reflect the lived realities in the areas we are focusing on. From individual advocates to community service providers, to public and private actors and leaders – the relationships we have developed across all sectors have helped us advance transformational policy reform, fuel our public interest litigation, and guide and illuminate our systemic inquiries.

Along with the larger Community Advisory Group, we created smaller groups of people and organizations with specific lived experience or expertise in key areas. Our advisory groups include: Education, Employment, Poverty and Indigenous Reconciliation.

Each group meets regularly and offers an opportunity for the community to add their input on the work we are doing, and to hold us to account for that work. We regularly call for governments and organizations to consult with vulnerable or equity seeking communities, so we believe it is important to hold ourselves to the same standards.

Although the OHRC’s focus on engaging with communities started well before we had to tackle a pandemic response, we have seen that the need for community engagement has never been more critical in these challenging times. In addition to implementing an internal system to facilitate timely identification of new and evolving COVID-19 issues which included daily and weekly analysis of COVID-19-related reports, statements and inquiries from government and media, the OHRC made it a priority to meet with stakeholder organizations, and Indigenous communities and organizations.

A good example of how community engagement propelled our work happened in January 2020 during the early days of COVID-19. The OHRC heard concerns from Chinese and Southeast Asian communities who were being labelled as COVID-19 carriers and experiencing forms of anti-Asian racism. Acting on these concerns, the OHRC issued a statement calling out xenophobia and pernicious racial stereotypes.

In March 2020, the OHRC quickly convened a group of human rights experts and stakeholders to engage on principles underlying a human rights-based approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic across a range of potential policy, legal, regulatory, public health and emergency related responses. These engagements culminated in the OHRC’s release of its Policy statement on a human rights-based approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic.

Both of these were among the first statements and initiatives commenced on these important issues by a human rights agency in Canada, and this wouldn’t have happened without our community connections.

In addition, throughout the year, we continued to listen to community perspectives for a better understanding of the impacts of COVID-19 on Human Rights Code-protected vulnerable communities. For example, in April 2020, after Ontario Health shared a draft Clinical Triage Protocol for Major Surge in COVID Pandemic (draft protocol) with hospitals and health care organizations, the OHRC wrote to the Minister of Health stressing that any progress to develop a draft protocol should include human rights experts and representatives from vulnerable groups.

The OHRC quickly began its own stakeholder consultations with organizations representing people with disabilities, Black and other racialized communities, and older people, who raised serious concerns about the potential negative impact of the draft protocol on vulnerable groups protected under the Code. The OHRC continued to engage with these stakeholders over the course of the year, including in December 2020, when the OHRC co-facilitated a meeting that brought together human rights stakeholders, bioethicists, policy makers and government representatives to discuss how to move forward with the draft protocol. The OHRC then relied on the perspectives shared from these engagements in its advocacy with the Ministry.

These are just a few examples of why community engagement will continue to drive our work to embed human rights in pandemic responses – and will continue to be a cornerstone of all of our work.

 


Bringing eLearning to life

In November 2020, OHRC launched the newest version of its main online training program, Human Rights 101third edition (2020). This revised eLearning program offers a fresh new look, expands discussions on types of discrimination, and shares the latest directions in human rights, along with added scenarios and knowledge checks. The course, designed to provide an understanding of rights and responsibilities under the Ontario Human Rights Code, covers:

  • The Code
  • Types of discrimination
  • Interpreting and applying the Code
  • Is this discrimination?
  • Ontario’s human rights system.

Human Rights 101, which is one of the OHRC’s most popular eLearning programs, also added new features on the technical side, as it became fully Flash-free and mobile-friendly, which makes it easier to navigate.

Also, the OHRC greatly expanded its roster of other learning tools available to organizations for their internal training. Anyone with a smart phone with Internet can now take Working Together: The Code and the AODA, about our rights and responsibilities under the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), and Call it out: racism, racial discrimination and human rights, our 30-minute interactive eCourse about race, racial discrimination and human rights protections under the Code.

Even before COVID-19, it had become clear that organizations are eager to provide tailored human rights and racism awareness training to their employees across Ontario. That’s why the OHRC worked to strengthen connections and deepen collaborations with learning design, human resource and training teams elsewhere in the public and private sectors. The result is the most robust collection of tools for organizations’ own learning management systems (LMS) with the greatest variety of options we have ever offered.

Many organizations worked with the OHRC to provide feedback and test prototypes of our products. These included the cities of Toronto and Windsor, the Town of Oakville, Mohawk College, the Real Estate Council of Ontario, Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies, Joseph Brant Hospital and several others. These organizations became the earliest adopters of HR101, Working Together and Call it Out.

To take any of these eCourses yourself, or to obtain a copy for your group’s viewing or training, visit eLearning.

 

Twitter iconTwitter

Irwin Elman @irwinelman
This is great @OntHumanRights! Is there a way we could create a child and youth friendly version? I know there are many who would assist if you are up for the challenge. Let’s do it!

 

Paolo De Buono, Rainbow #BLM, MSc, JD, OCT @misterdebuono
As an educator, don't wait for the human rights training that may not happen soon. There is learning available such as this 30-minute eLearning course by the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Your teaching services in ON are subject to the Ontario Human Rights Code.

 


Making personal connections across Ontario

In this challenging year, when in-person engagement with people across Ontario was not possible due to pandemic restrictions, the OHRC shifted its focus online. The Chief Commissioner, Commissioners and the Executive Director continued to be featured speakers at conferences, training sessions, public meetings, news conferences and other events. Through these online efforts, over 4,100 people were engaged in 39 public speaking events.

As well, the Chief Commissioner recorded two video addresses, with an estimated audience of over 200,000.

 

Speech/video highlights:

  • Department of Justice/Canadian Bar Association Conference, “The future of law”
  • Ontario Bar Association: “Annual update on human rights law”
  • Canadian Institute, 11th Annual Law of Policing Conference: “Racial profiling”
  • Ryerson University: “Anti-discrimination policies and practices in times of Black Lives Matter and COVID-19: Ontario and Baden-Württemberg compared”
  • Concerned Citizens and Advocates, Kenora: “Anti-Indigenous racism in Kenora

 


Continuing to focus on public education

The pandemic also posed a major challenge as the OHRC worked to provide human rights education across Ontario. This past year, many organizations cancelled events the OHRC would normally have been involved with, but we continued to engage online and remotely wherever possible. Training session highlights included:

  • Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto: “Taking a human rights-based approach to COVID-19
  • York Regional Police Hate Crime Conference: “Race-based hate and the Policy on eliminating racial profiling in law enforcement
  • Human Resources Professionals Association Systemic Racism Webinar Series: “Definitions and approaches to addressing systemic racism”
  • Niagara Catholic District School Board: “Human rights essentials for educators.”
  • Ontario Public School Boards Association: “Using Code special programs to hire diverse teachers”

 


Community Advisory Group continues to share, teach

Using a new approach to engagement, the Community Advisory Group (CAG) met virtually this year, participating in videoconferences in September and December, 2020. This group includes 44 community leaders, who represent diverse communities from across Ontario. Members learned about recent OHRC initiatives and shared current and emerging human rights issues affecting the communities they serve. Major themes included the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on already vulnerable groups leading to further marginalization, and the continued rise in hate including anti-Asian and anti-Black racism, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Member advice and insights have continued to guide ongoing OHRC work as well as plans for the coming year.  

 

Introducing the Community Advisory Group

  • Zanana Akande, Black Legal Action Centre
  • Elton Beardy, Feathers of Hope
  • Juana Berinstein, Association of Ontario Midwives
  • Paul Champ, Champ & Associates
  • Uppala Chandrasekera, Canadian Mental Health Association Ontario
  • Lisa Cirillo, Downtown Legal Services
  • Claudette Commanda, First Nations Confederacy of Cultural Education Centres
  • Mojdeh Cox, Canadian Labour Congress
  • Mike Creek, Working for Change
  • Jeremy Dias, The Canadian Centre for Gender and Sexual Diversity
  • Debbie Douglas, Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants
  • Yasin Dwyer, Ryerson University
  • Patti Fairfield, Ne-Chee Indigenous Friendship Centre
  • Mustafa Farooq, National Council of Canadian Muslims
  • Lyndon George, Hamilton Community Legal Clinic
  • Avvy Go, Chinese & Southeast Asian Legal Clinic
  • Kenneth Hale, Advocacy Centre for Tenants Ontario
  • Kelly Hannah-Moffat, University of Toronto
  • Dakota Heon, Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres Youth Council
  • Raihanna Hirji-Khalfan, Training Consultant
  • Carl James, York University
  • Salha Jeizan, Multicultural Inter-Agency Group of Peel
  • Saleha Khan, Peel Regional Police
  • Farrah Khan, Ryerson University
  • Anita Khanna, United Way Centraide Canada
  • Lori Kleinsmith, Bridges Community Health Centre
  • Shalini Konanur, South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario
  • Robert Lattanzio, ARCH Disability Law
  • Elizabeth McIsaac, Maytree
  • Fallon Melander, Metrolinx
  • Noa Mendelsohn Aviv, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
  • Juliette Nicolet, Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres
  • Kiki Ojo, Kojo Institute
  • Paula Osmok, John Howard Society of Ontario
  • Pam Palmater, Ryerson University
  • Jessica Reekie, Ontario Justice Education Network
  • Cecil Roach, York Region District School Board
  • Nancy Rowe, Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation
  • Neethan Shan, Urban Alliance on Race Relations
  • Talayeh Shomali, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
  • Balpreet Singh, World Sikh Organization of Canada
  • Catherine Soplet, Peel Poverty Action Group
  • Tony Kourie, Canadian Human Rights Commission
  • Clara Matheson, Human Rights Legal Support Centre

 


Employer Advisory Group sets three practical goals

The Employer Advisory Group (EAG) has identified three practical goals for its work: to evaluate the needs and priorities of employers; to evaluate current human rights tools and resources to determine if new tools are needed; and to recommend changes to the human rights adjudication process. While work on these goals was paused for most of 2020 as members pivoted to respond to the demands of the pandemic, it is now underway again.

In December 2020, the OHRC made significant progress on the third goal by facilitating a meeting involving EAG members, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) and the Ministry of the Attorney General to discuss challenges employers face in the human rights adjudication process. Issues raised by EAG members included procedural delays, insufficiency of skilled vice chairs, lack of settlement statistics, and the need for ongoing and meaningful stakeholder engagement. EAG members noted that these issues “significantly impede the HRTO’s ability to ensure that alleged violations of the Code are adjudicated in a fair, timely, transparent and professional manner that satisfies and meets public service standards for all parties, including employers.” At this very productive meeting, the HRTO outlined steps it is taking to address the identified deficiencies and invited EAG members to take part in stakeholder engagement opportunities planned for 2021.  

In January 2021, the EAG held its first plenary meeting since the onset of the pandemic. Members discussed challenges with the human rights adjudication process, and shared ways that COVID-19 has affected the sectors and employers they represent. Members expressed a strong interest in having a mechanism to bring new and emerging workplace human rights issues to the OHRC’s attention, and in being consulted on potential solutions.

 

Introducing the Employer Advisory Group

  • Jane Albright, Ontario Municipal Human Resources Association
  • Diane Brisebois, Retail Council of Canada
  • Cindy Cacciotti, Council of Ontario Universities
  • Lisa Carty, Office of the General Counsel, Deloitte LLP
  • Dennis Darby, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters
  • David DeSantis, Council of Directors of Education
  • Michael Duben, Ontario Municipal Administrators’ Association
  • Tony Elenis, Ontario Restaurant, Hotel and Motel Association
  • Janice Hall, Technation
  • Plamen Petkov, Canadian Federation of Independent Business
  • James Rilett, Restaurants Canada
  • Rocco Rossi, Ontario Chamber of Commerce
  • Laura Russell, Schedule 2 Employers’ Group
  • Carissa Tanzola, Ontario Bar Association – Labour and Employment Section
  • Louise Taylor Green, Human Resources Professionals Association

 


Calling on Facebook to prevent discrimination

In December 2020, the OHRC and the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) welcomed the news that Facebook has now implemented and is enforcing several safeguards to prevent discriminatory targeting of advertisements for housing, employment and credit opportunities in Canada.

This development arose after the OHRC and CHRC’s joint call for Facebook to take action on this issue. The commissions first wrote to Facebook in June 2019 to express concern that the platform enabled ads to be targeted in ways that excluded people based on protected characteristics, like age or gender, contrary to Canada’s federal and provincial human rights laws.

We urged Facebook to take several steps to address this issue, consistent with changes being made in the United States. In January 2021, Facebook publicly committed to making these changes in Canada by late 2021. Changes included:

  • Restricting the ability of advertisers to target ads that offer housing, employment and credit opportunities based on age, gender, postal code, or any other detailed options describing or appearing to relate to characteristics protected under Canadian and Ontario human rights laws
  • Providing education to all advertisers about discriminatory advertising, and requiring advertisers to self-declare that they are not engaging in discriminatory housing, employment or credit advertising
  • Monitoring for any housing, employment and credit ads that may still target in a discriminatory way, and preventing these ads from running
  • Providing access to all Canadian advertisements for employment, housing and credit opportunities in an Ad Library that can be viewed and searched by all users.

Advertising is how many Canadians learn about critical opportunities, like a job opening or an apartment for rent. Part of ensuring equal access to these opportunities is making sure everyone has a chance to learn about them in the first place. The importance of this is even more evident today than when the commissions first called on Facebook to make these changes. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented numbers of people facing precarious housing, employment and financial circumstances – with the people in our communities who were already the most marginalized being disproportionately affected.

It is imperative to make sure that available housing, employment and credit opportunities are advertised without discrimination and in line with human rights laws. The new safeguards are an important part of achieving this.

We know that Facebook is also aware of the need to ensure that its ad delivery algorithms are not themselves causing ads to be distributed in a discriminatory way. As automated decision-making and artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly relied on, it is critical that these systems are not biased and do not create or perpetuate systemic discrimination. We understand that Facebook is engaging experts, academics, researchers, and civil rights and privacy advocates on the issue of algorithmic bias, and is also using internal pilot projects to identify and address bias issues with its own algorithms. We urge Facebook to pursue all efforts to address algorithmic bias, and ask that Facebook report to us on developments it makes in this area.

The OHRC and CHRC look forward to seeing the operation of the new Canadian advertising safeguards and the further steps that Facebook takes to protect against discrimination.

 

Media highlights

 


Our Commissioners

Our Commissioners have in-depth knowledge and expertise in human rights and issues relating to vulnerable populations, public policy, social values, and concepts of fairness, justice and public service.

 

Ena Chadha, Chief Commissioner
Appointment: July 22, 2020 – July 21, 2021

 

Jewel Amoah
Appointment: May 28, 2020 – May 27, 2022

 

Randall Arsenault
Appointment: January 9, 2020 – January 8, 2022

 

Brian Eyolfson
Appointment: November 12, 2020 – November 11, 2022

 

Violetta Igneski
Appointment: January 9, 2020 – January 8, 2022

 

Renu Mandhane, Chief Commissioner
Appointment: October 30, 2015 – May 21, 2020

 

Gary Pieters
Appointment: March 25, 2021 – March 24, 2023

2020–21 performance targets and results

The OHRC continues our commitment to provide effective leadership on human rights for all Ontarians. The following are the OHRC’s performance targets and results for 2020–21. The OHRC will develop a new strategic plan for 2022–27. Key performance indicators and targets will be revised to align with the new plan.

Focus area: Reconciliation

Indicator 2020–21 Target Target met 2020–21 Result

Percentage of key Indigenous leaders and community members who agree or somewhat agree that the OHRC’s products and activities reflect a deep understanding of Indigenous perspectives

5 percentage point increase in responses to this survey question No 21.5 percentage point decrease
(-23.1%)

 

Focus area: Criminal justice

Indicator 2020–21 Target Target met 2020–21 Result
Percentage increase in number of police services that collect identifier data relating to services for the purposes of human rights compliance (at least one Code ground) 5 percentage point increase Yes 10 percentage point increase (+125%)
Number of prisoners placed in administrative segregation Zero prisoners in administrative segregation No 11% decrease (from 12,059 prisoners in 2018–19 to 10,727 prisoners in 2019–20), based on data available from the Ministry of the Solicitor General at this time
Number of prisoners with a mental health alert placed in segregation Zero prisoners with a mental health alert or mental health disability placed in segregation No 4 percentage point improvement
(+9.5%), based on data available from the Ministry of the Solicitor General at this time.

 

Focus area: Poverty

Indicator 2020–21 Target Target met 2020–21 Result
One new legal intervention in the area of poverty 1 new intervention Yes 1 OHRC intervention to address discrimination against people who experience poverty (Safe Streets Act)
Qualitative review of HRTO/court decisions relating to poverty issues Review to be conducted in 2022 n/a Review to be conducted in 2022

 

Focus area: Education

Indicator 2020–21 Target Target met 2020–21 Result
Percentage of school boards informing the OHRC that they have adopted OHRC recommendations in the Policy on accessible education for students with disabilities  5 percentage point increase  No 4 percentage point increase (+14.5%)
Percentage of education and school board stakeholders who “agree” or “somewhat agree” that Ontario’s curriculum is inclusive of various groups in society 5 percentage point increase  Yes 8 percentage point increase (+17.4%)

 

Focus area: Leadership voice

Indicator 2020–21 Target Target met 2020–21 Result
Cumulative reach for OHRC in traditional and social media, OHRC website hits/unique views Maintain potential reach Yes Potential reach: 273.8% increase (2,972,874,704)
Maintain unique website views Yes Unique website views: 32.4% increase (5,341,196)
5% increase in social media followers and friends over 2019 Yes Social media followers and friends: 16.8% increase in net followers (35,513)

 

Focus area: Our relationships

Indicator 2020–21 Target Target met 2020–21 Result
Percentage of community leaders and experts and duty holders, including employment and business leaders and police and school board stakeholders who “agree” or “somewhat agree” that the OHRC maintains effective relationships with all stakeholders Maintain number of community leaders who “agree” or “somewhat agree” No Community leaders: 11 percentage point decrease (-16.2%)
10 percentage point increase in the number of duty holders, including employment and business leaders and police and school board stakeholders, who “agree” or “somewhat agree” No Duty holders: 3 percentage point increase (+8.8%)

 

Focus area: Our people

Indicator 2020–21 Target Target met 2020–21 Result
Percentage increase in relevant question areas in annual OPS employee engagement survey for OHRC staff Percentage point increase in 2019 employee engagement survey over 2018 survey results:
Organizational Communication (+15)
Yes Organizational Communication: +17.5 percentage points (+60%)
Career Advancement (+10) No Career Advancement: +8.3 percentage points (+23%)
Leadership Practices (+20) Yes Leadership Practices: +26 percentage points (+67%)
Employee Recognition (+10) Yes Employee Recognition: +22.4 percentage points (+70%)
Hiring Practices (+25) No Hiring Practices: +18 percentage points (+53%)

2020–21 Financial summary

2020–2021 financial summary (April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021)

  2020-21 Printed Estimates
($’000)
Revised Budget March 31, 2021
($’000)
Actual Expenditures March 31, 2021
($’000)
2020-21 Year End Variance from Revised Budget
($’000)
$ %
Salaries & Wages 4,472.7 4,140.0 4,143.1 -3.1 -0.07%
Benefits 366.3 495.6 490.2 5.4 1.09%
Other Direct Operating Expenses (ODOE) 485.5 523.8 519.2 4.6 0.88%
Total Expenses 5,324.5 5,159.4 5,152.5 6.9 0.13%

 

2020–21 OHRC appointee remuneration

  Total remuneration for FY 2020–21 Annual salary
Renu Mandhane, Chief Commissioner (Former) $50,908.86 $186,621.00
Ena Chadha, Chief Commissioner $108,826.30 $174,184.00
Total $159,735.16 Not applicable

 

Appointee (part-time) Total remuneration for FY 2020-21 Per diem remuneration rate
Violetta Igneski, Commissioner $5,821.50 $472.00
Randall Arsenault, Commissioner $4,720.00 $472.00
Jewel Amoah, Commissioner $3,422.00 $472.00
Brian Eyolfson, Commissioner $1,180.00 $472.00
Gary Pieters, Commissioner $0.00 $472.00
Total $15,143.50 Not applicable