E.P. v. The Children’s Aid Society of Niagara Region, 2009 HRTO 707

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

E.P.

Applicant

-and-

The Children’s Aid Society of Niagara Region

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: David A. Wright

Date: May 28, 2009

Citation: 2009 HRTO 707

Indexed as: E.P. v. Children’s Aid Society of Niagara Region

1This Application, filed under s. 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, alleges discrimination in goods, services and facilities on the basis of disability, creed, family status and receipt of public assistance. It alleges violations of the Code through: (i) a decision of the Ontario Court of Justice dated May 1, 2008 that made the applicant’s son a Ward of the Crown and committed him to the care and custody of the respondent Children’s Aid Society; and (ii) the nature of the care the applicant’s son has received while in the custody of the respondent, including an alleged refusal to let him practice his religion and decisions about medical treatment.

2In an earlier Interim Decision, 2009 HRTO 591, the Tribunal sought submissions from the applicant regarding whether the Application raised matters that are within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction (power) to decide.

3The applicant provided submissions in which she states that she has suffered an injustice that is contrary to her human rights and the rule of law and states that the Human Rights Commission must have some authority to address this issue. She cites various sections of the Code, including s. 29, which sets out the functions of the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

4The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario is a separate entity from the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The Tribunal does not have the powers set out in s. 29 of the Code, and if the applicant wishes the Commission to exercise any of these powers, she must contact it directly. The Tribunal’s role is to adjudicate Applications alleging violations of the specific provisions of the Code. The Tribunal does not have a general power to investigate allegations of wrongdoing or review the decisions of courts or tribunals.

5Section 1 of the Code, under which the applicant filed this Application, reads as follows:

Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities, without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or disability.

6I find that the allegations do not fall under the Code, and that the Application therefore does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The decision and order of Justice Martin cannot constitute discrimination in goods, services or facilities by the respondent, the Children’s Aid Society of Niagara Region. This Tribunal has held that “[t]he content, reasons and result contained in a decision of a statutory decision-maker cannot be understood to be part of the ‘service’ a statutory Tribunal is providing to the public”: Baird v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal, 2009 HRTO 99 at para. 12. Similarly, the content, reasons and result contained in a decision of a judge cannot be considered to be part of the services being provided by a Children’s Aid Society.

7In my view the care provided to the applicant’s son, who is now a Ward of the Crown and in the care and custody of the respondent, cannot be discrimination against her with respect to services within the meaning of the Code. She does not bring the Application on the child’s behalf nor does she have custody of him.

8I understand the applicant’s strongly held view that she has suffered injustice and that she would like to remedy it. However, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has no jurisdiction over the matters raised in this Application. It is therefore dismissed.