Riad v. Waterloo Regional Police Services, 2012 HRTO 148

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Ashraf Riad

Applicant

• and-

Waterloo Regional Police Services, Brian Etheridge and Anita Etheridge

Respondents

INTERIM decision

Adjudicator: Ian R. Mackenzie

Date: January 19, 2012

Citation: 2012 HRTO 148

Indexed as: Riad v. Waterloo Regional Police Services

wRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Ashraf Riad, Applicant ) Self-represented

Regional Municipality of Waterloo ) Police Services Board, Respondent ) Gary Melanson, Counsel

Brian Etheridge and Anita Etheridge, ) Respondents ) Melanie Reist, Counsel

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”).

2The Application was deferred pending the completion of two related proceedings (2010 HRTO 1807). The two proceedings were an appeal to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission and a Peace Bond application.

3Those proceedings are now completed. The applicant has requested that the Application be reactivated. The respondents consent to the reactivation.

4The respondents have filed Requests for an Order during a Proceeding (RFOP) requesting the dismissal of the Application on the basis that the other proceedings have appropriately dealt with the substance of the Application (section 45.1 of the Code).

5The respondents have submitted that in order to proceed with the request to dismiss on the basis of section 45.1 of the Code, as it concerns the Peace Bond application, the transcript of the proceeding is required. As of the date of this Interim Decision, the transcript had been ordered, but not received. The respondents submitted that the scheduling of a hearing on the RFOPs should be delayed until the transcript is received.

6The applicant opposes the request for a hearing of the RFOPs relating to section 45.1 of the Code for the following reasons:

a. The other proceedings have not dealt with the substance of the Application and human rights principles were not applied; and

b. None of the other proceedings explicitly deal with all of the named respondents in the Application.

ANALYSIS AND DECISION

7The respondents consent to the reactivation of the Application. Since the other proceedings are now completed, it is appropriate to reactivate the Application.

8The respondents have requested a hearing of their requests to dismiss the Application on the basis of section 45.1 of the Code. The applicant objects to the request. However, his objection is based on his disagreement that the substance of the Application has been appropriately dealt with. This is an argument that he can make at the hearing and is not a reason to deny a request for a hearing. He also objects because not all of the named respondents were included in the other proceedings. Without determining whether this is or is not the case, it is still clear that some of the named respondents were parties to the other proceedings.

9A hearing to determine if the other proceedings have appropriately dealt with the substance of the Application (section 45.1 of the Code) is appropriate.

10The transcript of the Peace Bond proceeding will be necessary for the hearing. The respondents have not indicated when the transcript will be ready. The respondents are to advise the Tribunal when the transcript has been completed. At that point a hearing by teleconference will be scheduled by the Registrar. The directions below will apply to the hearing.

11The Tribunal makes the following orders:

a. the Application is reactivated;

b. a hearing on the requests to dismiss pursuant to section 45.1 of the Code will be scheduled after the Tribunal is advised that the transcript of the Peace Bond proceeding is available.

c. the following directions will apply to the hearing:

i. the hearing will address only the question of dismissal pursuant to section 45.1 of the Code;

ii. the respondent should be prepared to proceed first at the hearing; and

iii. any party wishing to rely on written materials not already filed with the Tribunal or any facts not contained in the Applications or Responses must deliver such documents or information to the other parties and file them with the Registrar no more than 21 days prior to the scheduled hearing date.

12I am not seized.