Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
B E T W E E N:
Ashraf Riad Applicant
-and-
The Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board, Brian Etheridge and Anita Etheridge Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Sherry Liang Date: November 9, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 2241 Indexed as: Riad v. Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board
1This is an Application filed on February 1, 2010 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the "Code").
2By Interim Decision dated September 2, 2010, 2010 HRTO 1807, the Tribunal deferred consideration of the Application pending the completion of proceedings before the Ontario Civilian Police Commission ("OCPC") and under the Criminal Code.
3The applicant has filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings in which he asks that his Application be re-activated. The respondent the Regional Municipality of Waterloo Police Services Board (the "Board") opposes the Request; the personal respondents have not responded.
4Upon review of the submissions of the parties, the Tribunal denies the Request.
5It is apparent that the proceedings before the OCPC and the criminal courts have not been concluded.
6The applicant states that he wishes to "appeal" the Interim Decision. The Tribunal's Rules do not provide for appeals from interim decisions. The Rules do permit parties to ask the Tribunal to reconsider a decision, but a request for reconsideration is only available with respect to final decisions of the Tribunal (see Rule 26). A decision to defer is not a final decision and there is therefore no basis for a request to reconsider.
7In any event, while it is apparent that the applicant disagrees with the decision to defer, he does not make any arguments that could not have been made earlier. The only exception is the applicant's reference to events since the date of the Interim Decision. He describes an incident on September 10, 2010 which he appears to allege is a further instance of discrimination. The applicant states that he has chosen not to make a complaint with the Office of the Independent Police Review Director over this incident. I find that these new circumstances do not justify re-activation of the Application, given that the other processes are still pending.
8In conclusion, the applicant has provided no basis for the Tribunal to re-activate the Application and the Request is denied.
9I am not seized of this matter.
Dated at Toronto this 9th day of November, 2010.
"signed by"
Sherry Liang Vice-chair