Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Vriend v. Alberta

Hassan, Eimaan, Preet and Fatima

About the Case

  • Vriend v Alberta took place in 1998
  • Significant Supreme Court of Canada case
  • Ascertained that a provincial act's exclusion can be a Charter violation
  • About the firing of a teacher due to his sexual orientation (homosexuality)
  • Stirred up controversy

Facts

In 1988, Delwin Vriend was employed as a lab coordinator at King's College, a private Christian college in Edmonton, Alberta, where he received many benefits and positive evaluations for his work

After a college board meeting in January 1991, a decision was made by the college authorities to request Vriend's resignation which he declined.

Vriend was later fired.

The reasoning was unknown at first, as he did not fail to do his job properly. So what was the reason for his dismissal?

The reasoning for his dismissal was his sexual orientation (homosexuality) which he revealed to College authorities upon request a year earlier

"Discrimination: an action or a decision that treats a person or a group badly for reasons such as their race, age or disability."

https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/eng/content/what-discrimination

CHRC Definition

When Vriend went to the Alberta Human Rights Commission to issue a complaint, he could not do so.

This was because sexual orientation was not a illegal ground of discrimination under the Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act.

Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act: The human rights act enacted by the Alberta provincial government in 1966 for the province. All other provinces also have their own human rights act.

The exclusion of sexual orientation as a illegal ground of discrimination was odd as in most parts of Canada, such treatment would have been discrimination

Vriend began a legal case arguing that the Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act violated the 15th section of the Charter.

Charter of Rights and Freedoms: A bill of rights and a powerful legal tool that is part of the Canadian constitution. It was put together by PM Trudeau (not the one in office right now) and was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II in 1982. The Charter ensures a wide range of equality rights and fundamental freedoms such as of expression and religion.

The Supreme Court of Canada agreed with Vriend without any opposition but the decision was overturned at appeal.

History of LGBT Rights in Canada before this Case

Before 1965: During the British America and British North American time periods, homosexuality was punished by execution. This changed in the late 1800s when these laws were replaced with "gross indecency laws".

1965: Everett Klippert is arrested and imprisoned indefinitely for being gay and having sex with male partners. He is deemed a "dangerous sex offender".

1969: PM Trudeau decriminalizes homosexuality as amendment to the Criminal Code.

1971: Klippert is released from prison.

1977: Quebec is the first province to include sexual orientation in its Human Rights Code as an illegal ground of discrimination.

1978: A new Immigration Act is passed that allows gays to immigrate to the country.

History of LGBT Rights in Canada before this Case (Cont'd)

1979: The CHRC recommends that "sexual orientation" should be added to the Canadian Human Rights Act. Attempts to add sexual orientation to many federal acts including the CHRA are defeated over the next twelve years.

1981: Canada's "Stonewall" occurs when massive protests break out by the LGBT community after raids are taken place at gay bath houses the night before with more than 300 gay men arrested.

1982: The Charter is passed which gave equality rights based on race, sex, religion, age, etc. However sexual orientation wasn't added until later.

1988: Svend Robinson becomes the first MP to come out as gay.

1989: The CHRC ruled that same-sex couples (and their children) should be considered families.

1996: Bill C-33 is passed adding sexual orientation in the CHRA

Relation to The Charter of Rights and Freedom

Charter of Rights

  • Delvin Vriend (V), has lost his job because of discrimination
  • he wanted for there to be justice for him
  • he wanted his rights to be heard
  • the charter of rights at the time, did not protect Delvin from discrimination

What was the problem?

  • the charter of rights did not include any protection for homosexuals
  • In s.15, there is a list of prohibited discrimination
  • homosexuality is not included
  • Delvin wanted this to change

Relation

Individual Rights Protection Act

IRPA

  • The government of Alberta did not want negativity from the public so they made this act
  • they made new ground of prohibition on discrimination
  • 9 types of discrimination are added
  • these include race, gender, origin, color and religion
  • punishable by law

What this this act cover up?

Truth

  • The government did not want to give rights to homosexuals
  • They used this act to make it seem like they are giving right
  • However, homosexuality was not included in this act
  • The government indirectly discriminated against homosexuals
  • people in other provinces also started to stand up for homosexuals

Supreme Court Ruling

Court Ruling

  • The court ruled in favor of Vriend as it thought that the respondents didn't have any proper reasons for firing Vriend
  • The court looked at the list of prohibited discriminating acts in s.15 and found that it does not include discrimination of sexuality
  • The court also looked at s.32 and found that it does not only limit the court to using positive ways to ensure that rights are not being violated
  • It is not only to protect rights or exercise authority, but it can be used as a tool for citizens to challenge the law

S.32(1): Describes the basis on which right can be enforced

S.32(2): Added to delay the enforcement of s.15 until the government was given time to amend their laws to conform to the section

  • Studying the sexual orientation provision in the Individual Rights Protection Act was not more preferable than just disregarding the IRPA as the Alberta legislature repeatedly indicated that they did not wish to have such rights in the document
  • The IRPA included homosexuals
  • The legislature may in turn use the Notwithstanding clause to pass a new IRPA

IRPA: The human rights act used in Alberta. Each province has its own human rights act.

Notwithstanding clause: Officially called s.33, it allows provincial or federal authorities to override sections of the charter for a 5-year period

  • In concluding, the court ruled that to assess the situation of sexual orientation, it must be clearly stated in the IRPA
  • The court dismissed the respondent's submission as an explanation as it lacked a goal and purpose
  • The court rejected their rationale as inappropriate and a poor basis for justifying a charter violation
  • Though the legislature must balance between religious and protections of gays and lesbians, the legislature made no compromise between rights at all
  • Following the verdict, some Alberta MLAs called for the government to overrule the decision by invoking the notwithstanding clause
  • However, Alberta's premier at that time, Ralph Klein, decided not to do this and said that any public protest was hateful
Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi