HUMAN RIGHTS |
Zündel v. Citron
A-25-00
2001 FCA 212, Malone J.A.
25/6/01
8 pp.
Appeal from FCTD order ((1999), 20 Admin. L.R. (3d) 198) dismissing appellant's application for judicial review of HRT decision dismissing motion for dismissal of complaints on grounds of reasonable apprehension of bias in HRT panel arising from wording of Human Rights Act, s. 48.1(2) (appointees to Tribunal must have experience, expertise and interest in, and sensitivity to, human rights)--Appellant argued provision raising reasonable apprehension all appointees thereunder have inherent bias towards human rights when acting in adjudicative role--Appeal raising two issues: whether panel subject to provisions of Act, s. 48.1(2); whether Act, s. 48.1(2) qualification requirements giving rise to reasonable apprehension such persons biassed--Appeal dismissed--Panel not subject to Act, s. 48.1(2): Northwest Territories v. Public Service Alliance of Canada, [2001] F.C.J. No. 791 (C.A.) (QL)--Obiter: phrase "sensitivity to human rights" connoting awareness of and interest in human rights--Not connoting predilection in favour of human rights: R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484--In context of qualifications for appointment, sensitivity implying no more than need to recognize and be aware of human rights in broadest sense--Not requiring predisposition to arguments in support of or favourable to human rights--Not involving insensitivity to other rights--Only meant to exclude people with closed minds on human rights issues--Conclusion supported by French language version: "être sensibilisés"--Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6, s. 48.1(2) (as am. by S.C. 1998, c. 9, s. 27).