Knight v. A.A. World Services, Inc., 2016 HRTO 208

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Lawrence Knight

Applicant

-and-

A.A. World Services Inc., General Services Board of Alcoholics Anonymous Inc. and Greater Toronto Intergroup

Respondents

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Laurie Letheren

Date: February 17, 2016

Citation: 2016 HRTO 208

Indexed as: Knight v. A.A. World Services, Inc.

APPEARANCES

Lawrence Knight, Applicant

Self-represented

Greater Toronto Intergroup, Respondent

James Henderson, Counsel

General Services Board of Alcoholics Anonymous Inc. and A.A. World Services, Inc., Respondents

J. Anthony Caldwell, Counsel

Introduction

1This Application alleges discrimination with respect to services because of creed contrary to the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”).

2The applicant alleges, among other things, that the respondent, GTA Intergroup of Alcoholics Anonymous (GTAI), is responsible for maintaining a list of all Alcoholics Anonymous meetings in the Greater Toronto Area. The applicant alleges that GTAI removed the applicant’s Alcoholics Anonymous group from its directory, website listing and listing given over the phone because the group members are agnostic. It is further alleged that the members of the applicant’s group have been denied the right to vote and to have their voices heard on matters that are important to all AA members.

3The applicant alleges that the respondents, A.A. World Services Inc., General Services Board of Alcoholics Anonymous Inc., discriminated against him when it failed to direct the GTAI to include his group as a member of the intergroup.

4In Interim Decision, 2015 HRTO 1306, the Tribunal directed the Registrar to schedule a summary hearing teleconference in order to determine the issue of whether the applicant had a reasonable prospect of demonstrating that the respondents discriminated against the applicant in the delivery of its services when it removed his group from its directories, and denied them the rights that come with membership in the intergroup.

5A summary hearing was held on January 13, 2016 during which time I heard submissions from the applicant and each of the respondents.

6In addition to listing and de-listing all the AA groups in the GTA, it appears that the GTAI collects and distributes donations and distributes AA literature that is published by the General Services Board of AA.

7The respondent, GTAI, submits that the Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) recovery program follows 12 steps and that these steps involve a belief in God. GTAI submits that evidence indicates that its purpose is to practice the 12 steps and practice a belief in God. In order to be part of GTAI, a group must be prepared to practice the 12 steps and thus the members of the group must have a belief in God. GTAI submits that it is not denying the applicant’s group the right to form its own intergroup and follow its own process.

8GTAI submits that is a special interest group that is protected, by section 18 of the Code, from a finding that it has breached the applicant’s Code rights. Section 18 of the Code, states,

Rights … are not infringed where membership or participation in a religious, philanthropic, educational, fraternal or social institution or organization that is primarily engaged in serving the interests of persons identified by a prohibited ground of discrimination is restricted to persons who are similarly identified.

9GTAI also submits that it is a bona fide requirement that groups that wish to be part of this intergroup must have a belief in the higher power of God.

10The applicant submits that AA is a fellowship of men and women who share the common desire to achieve sobriety. The only requirement for membership in AA is this desire to achieve sobriety and to help others in this achievement. The applicant referenced a number of publications which he alleges support a position that AA was not meant to be presented on any religious terms and that atheists and agnostics have been included as members in other parts of Canada and the United States over the years in order to promote an inclusive approach to AA membership rather than promote any religious perspective. He referenced documents that discussed the many paths to spirituality, including “making the AA group itself the higher power”.

11It is obvious that there is a dispute on the facts and legal issues that are fundamental to a determination on whether the applicant’s rights under the Code have been breached by the respondents’ actions. At this point, I am not prepared to find that the applicant has no reasonable prospect of demonstrating that his rights to be free from discrimination on the basis if his creed have been breached. There are a number of complex legal issues that will need to be addressed in this Application and they cannot be properly determined without the benefit of a full evidentiary record. It would not be appropriate to dismiss this Application at this point.

ORDER

12The Application will proceed through the Tribunal process.

13The respondents shall file their Responses within 35 days of receiving this Interim Decision.

14I am not seized.