Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Lawyer wants human rights tribunal cited for contempt of court.

The lawyer seems to have a point. It is rather strange to hear evidence before determining whether one has jurisdiction in the case, especially when a court has ruled that the jurisdiction matter should be dealt with first. Sometimes human rights tribunals are rather overbearing and arrogant filled with their own self importance and not even aware that they themselves may be involved in violating rights! This is from the Montreal Gazette.

Comic's lawyer wants human rights tribunal cited for contempt of court


A lawyer for standup comedian Guy Earle, who has been accused of making homophobic remarks, has filed a motion in B.C. Supreme Court asking that the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal be cited for contempt.

Jim Millar’s motion also asks that the section of the Human Rights Code being applied in the case be declared unconstitutional because it violates Earle’s right to freedom of expression.

The move comes after Millar walked out of a tribunal hearing earlier this week after protesting that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter.

In his Supreme Court motion, Millar says that a prior court ruling by B.C. Supreme Court Justice Peter Willcock called for the issue of jurisdiction to be dealt with before any hearing proceeds.

He said the decision by the tribunal to hear the jurisdictional issue after hearing the evidence puts it in contempt of court.

Earle was accused of subjecting Lorna Pardy and her same-sex partner to a tirade of homophobic and sexist comments during a performance by Earle at Zesty’s restaurant in Vancouver on May 22, 2007.

No comments: