The past decade witnessed more than its share of horrors - one need only point to Rwanda, Kosovo and East Timor. But it also saw the emergence of a widely shared acceptance of the principle that human rights were integral to the functioning of civil society. This imperative led to the arrest in the United Kingdom of the former President of Chile to face charges arising from the deaths of political opponents two decades earlier. It also paved the way for the establishment of a War Crimes Tribunal, and the holding of trials, under international auspices, of people accused of atrocities in their own countries. As expressed by Václav Havel, President of the Czech Republic, in his memorable address to the Senate and the House of Commons in April 1999, we are gradually bringing the human race to the realization that a human being is more important than a state.

Various factors are contributing to the increased significance attached to human rights: the emergence of pluralist democracies throughout the world, advances in information technology, and the blurring of national borders. For the first time, international economic institutions such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development are considering ways to promote human rights principles within their programs. The World Trade Organization is also examining how trade and human rights can be linked. A number of multinational corporations, realizing that social responsibility is needed to maintain sustainable growth, have begun to integrate human rights principles into their business strategies. Relationships between countries, once dominated by security and commercial considerations, now routinely include human rights components. More and more, human rights are now the lens through which the actions of governments are viewed.

Canada has both influenced and been affected by this evolution, as human rights and equity issues have moved into the mainstream of national concerns. Internationally, we have been commended once more by the United Nations Economic and Social Council as the country enjoying the best quality of life. However, we have also been taken to task for continuing socioeconomic disparities, most notably those affecting Aboriginal Canadians. At home, there is perhaps a growing awareness that economic and social development are intimately linked with human rights. It is certain that guarantees of equality before the law will ring hollow to those whose poverty, lack of education and limited access to employment continue to deny them equal opportunity. Aboriginal Canadians and people with disabilities continue to be over-represented in these categories.

The Machinery of Human Rights

In April 1999, the Minister of Justice announced the government's intention to undertake a comprehensive review of the Canadian Human Rights Act. A distinguished panel, chaired by Gérard La Forest, a former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, was appointed to examine the current law and report to the Minister on recommended changes. The Commission fully supports the review: while the Act has been amended from time to time, no comprehensive examination of the legislation has been undertaken since its enactment in 1977. Since then, of course, Canadian society and our understanding of the concept of human rights have undergone significant changes.

The review panel has solicited written submissions and has met with groups in various regions of Canada. The Commission has also met with the panel. The panel is expected to submit its report to the Minister in the spring of 2000. Naturally, the Commission awaits the results of the review with keen anticipation.

There are certain features of the present Act that, by common agreement, need attention. The existing complaints process is an obvious example. It has become too lengthy and complex, far from the simple model envisaged by the legislators a generation ago. There is a need to simplify procedures and introduce a level of flexibility that would permit the Commission to differentiate between cases presenting issues of substantive discrimination and those that are clearly matters of poor labour relations or a manifestation of a breakdown in communications between the parties.

The Commission hopes that future changes to the law will also better equip it to address issues of systemic discrimination. Society has come a long way from the day when employers could openly deny job opportunities to particular groups, whether women, Jews, or people of colour. But barriers to employment and to accessing services continue to exist, often as the result of quite unintentional but nonetheless harmful policies or practices. In such instances, individual complaints are not always the most effective way to achieve change. Alternatives that the Commission would hope to see considered include the use of audit powers and the authority to undertake inquiries on specific issues, or in particular sectors or industries, without the need for a complaint to be filed.

The Commission has suggested in the past that more attention should be given to Canada's international human rights obligations. Although little known to most Canadians, these are nonetheless commitments that should shape our responses to a range of issues. The review of the Canadian Human Rights Act provides an opportunity to incorporate in a more visible way the international dimension of human rights. For example, specific mention of Canada's adherence to such instruments as the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights might be included in any new law. Also, consideration should, in our view, be given to mandating the Commission to comment on Canada's performance in light of its international human rights commitments.

Towards a Renewed Commission

While the Commission strongly believes that a new legislated framework would assist in safeguarding human rights in the new millennium, this does not mean that life should stand still until Parliament decides to act. We are of the view that steps can be taken to improve the working of the present law. With this in mind, the Commission launched a renewal project during 1998, to be completed by April 2001.

Central to the renewal plan is the elimination of the current backlog of complaints, the retooling of existing complaints procedures, and an in-depth examination of the complaints management system. The goal is to improve the timeliness, transparency and effectiveness of complaints processing, which has become more complex in this rapidly changing environment.

During 1999, the Commission focused its resources on dealing with the complaints that were more than nine months old. As well, a pilot project to test mediation as a tool to help parties reach settlements early in the complaints process is under way, and is commented on in more detail in the chapter on Human Rights Protection. Compliance procedures, manuals and computer systems are also being updated.

During the year 2000, the Commission will review its service and performance standards to ensure that these adequately address Canadians' needs.

Decisions of Significance

A separate Legal Report summarizes the decisions of human rights tribunals and the courts handed down during the past year. Individual chapters in the report also provide more details on decisions related to their specific subject matter. But several cases whose impact is likely to be far-reaching are worthy of particular note.

First is the important settlement reached by the Treasury Board and the Public Service Alliance of Canada in the longstanding federal public service pay equity dispute. An agreement on how to calculate the compensation due to the complainants came on October 29, 1999, just ten days after the Federal Court upheld the July 1998 ruling by a human rights tribunal. The tribunal had found that government employees in predominantly female job categories were not receiving equal pay for work of equal value. The agreement affects some 230,000 current and former public servants, ranging from secretaries and clerks to hospital and library workers, more than 85 per cent of whom are women.

Though the decision provoked great discussion, the Commission views the resolution as a positive step. Job evaluation systems, such as those used for pay equity, enable us to move beyond comparing identical jobs. As long as women are concentrated in a small number of occupations, such systems will be needed to ensure fairness.

Two Supreme Court of Canada decisions handed down during the year - one dealing with sex discrimination, the other with disability - will have an important impact in the human rights field.

The first case, Meiorin, concerned a woman who had been employed by the province of British Columbia in an elite firefighting unit for more than two years. In 1994, Ms. Meiorin failed one of several new fitness tests and lost her employment. A subsequent grievance launched by her union was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court decided in favour of Ms. Meiorin, agreeing with an earlier arbitrator's ruling that the government had failed to justify the tests as a bona fide occupational requirement by providing credible evidence that her inability to meet the standard created a safety risk.

A second decision, Grismer, extended the application of the Meiorin principle to people with disabilities. Although Terry Grismer had repeatedly passed British Columbia's driving test, he had been denied a licence because the provincial Superintendent of Motor Vehicles refused to grant them to people with his particular visual impairment. Noting that many other countries granted licences to people with this impairment, the Court endorsed the principle that people with disabilities should be judged by what they are actually able to do, not by abstract or general standards.

Both the Meiorin and Grismer decisions oblige federally regulated employers and service providers to ensure that their standards foster real equality. They emphasize the need for systemic accommodation to ensure equal opportunity, rather than individual exceptions on a case-by-case basis.

The Commission will endeavour to ensure that employers and providers of services within the federal sphere are made aware of the significance of the Meiorin and the Grismer decisions, which are described further in the chapter on Disability.

Return to Table of Contents