Courtesy of Free Dominion, a leaked CHRC document concerning various parties’ request for an open and transparent hearing is not being totally accepted by the CHRC because of – get this – “security concerns” of the witnesses.
Here is a sample of comments from the CHRC petition to the Tribunal:
Since January, this information has been widely diffused on the internet and elsewhere. A great deal of anger has been expressed on various websites, particularly against Mr. Steacy. This has included postings which have been threatening in tone and of which samples are attached.
My goodness. Anger. Ooooooooooh. Is that something now subject to prosecution in the CHRA too? Sad faces and frowns are to be inserted in S. 13 of the CHRA?
Nobody honestly believes that such “threats” are serious. They are merely people who are going overboard in their venting. If you want to see an actual assault in question, click here and read about the parties who are encouraging an actual assault. The CHRC, its employees, and former employees sure have a lot of nerve trying to limit full access, considering its past, present, and the things it is now accused of.
Of course, any justification will do to excuse the public from having access to this circus. It’s pretty pathetic. This post hits the nail on the head:
The Commission produces evidence (minus the URL and any identifying markers which should have been on the bottom of each page) of one poster on a message board who is obviously angry. If this is all it takes to exclude the public from a hearing dealing with matters going to the fundamental constitutional rights of Canadians on the internet, then there is every reason for persons to assume false identities to post up threats. (Source)
Here’s a suggestion: hire a couple of security guards and frisk anyone who wants to come in. That should take away any delusional clear and present danger Mr. Stacey might be under.
It is obvious that there is public interest in the hearing, and the Commission does not suggest that this should be ignored. The Commission continues to support the principle that the public should have as much access as is possible to Tribunal proceedings. In this case, the Commission submits that there are measures which could be put in place which might better accommodate the members of the public who wish to attend the hearing, while also acknowledging the serious concerns expressed by the Commission with respect to the witnesses’ security.
Give me a break. Anyone really intent on engaging in violence against Dean Stacey would not do so at the hearing. They would do it afterwards.
1. The Commission proposes a variation of the Tribunal’s Ruling of May 7, 2007 in order to allow a “live” broadcast of the hearing to members of the public in a separate room. In addition, the Commission would not object to a video link from the hearing room into a separate room, insofar as the witness cannot be observed via that link.
2. The Commission proposes that cameras not be pennitted in this “observation” room.
3. The Commission proposes that there be a prohibition against photographs in the hearing room and, to the extent possible, on all Tribunal premises.
Remember, the Canadian Human Rights Commission is one of the “defendants” in this hearing with its employee, Dean Stacey. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is the “judge”. Just thought I’d throw that in so everyone knows what a fair and balanced process we have going on here.
And here’s another thing that bothers me. There is something fundamentally disordered about public servants trolling around websites collecting comments to use to defend one of their own employees – all on the public’s dime. Like, get a real job, loser!
The truth of the matter is that Mr. Steacy has really nothing to fear except, of course, what his reputation and his employer will be going through as the light of day starts to shine on the coakroach chamber.