THUNDER BAY — The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has ruled that it cannot consider a complaint of discrimination against either a Thunder Bay crown attorney or the Ministry of the Attorney General.
An application alleging discrimination was made by the guardian of a First Nations child who was allegedly assaulted at a Thunder Bay school.
Thunder Bay Police investigated the incident and consulted a crown attorney, who advised that laying a charge would be "inappropriate and contrary to Ministry Standards."
In the application to the Human Rights Tribunal, the child's guardian said the crown attorney failed to contact the family and disregarded standard procedural requirements to consider victim perspectives and interests,
"Neither the Crown Attorney nor the Chief of Police explained to [the family] why it was not in the public interest to lay charges. Further, it is unclear as to whether or not there was any regard or consideration of the perspective and interests of First Nations communities in coming to the decision...This complete disregard for the perspective and interests of First Nations communities stands in stark contrast to the tender treatment of [the alleged assaulter] whose conduct was never the subject of rigorous police investigation," the application alleged.
It further alleged that the crown attorney's office failed to take into account "the historical and contemporary experiences of discrimination" faced by Indigenous people in the educational and justice systems.
In an interim decision in 2017, the HRTO dismissed the application against the crown attorney after concluding the matter was outside its jurisdiction.
It noted previous findings by the tribunal that the actions of prosecutors in the course of carrying out their duties are not services within the meaning of the Human Rights Code and are not subject to the Code because of prosecutorial immunity.
This month, the HRTO issued its ruling with respect to the second respondent in the case, the Ministry of the Attorney General.
It dismissed that application as well, saying that since the crown attorney's actions are outside its jurisdiction, under Ontario law an application with respect to the same matter cannot be brought against the Attorney General.
The tribunal noted that its decision does not address "whether the applicants were treated in a discriminatory manner...nor does it address whether the crown attorney should have interacted with the applicants in a different manner, including one that was respectful to their perspectives and interests as members of a First Nation."
Rather, it said, the decision addresses a "very narrow legal question" of whether the allegations against the Attorney General can stand on their own once the application was dismissed against the crown attorney.
