Suchergebnisse

Ontario's human rights legislation is based upon the premise that a person is not free if, by reason only of his particular race, color or creed, he is denied employment, housing or access to services & accommodation which are normally available to the public. The history of the legislation is outlined, from the Anti-Slavery Act of 1793 through a series of statutes passed between 1944 to 1961 which were consolidated into the Ontario Human Rights Code of 1962 & subsequent amendments. The functions of the Ontario Human Rights Commission are analyzed in 3 areas: (1) compliance & enforcement; (2) educ; (3) res. The section on compliance & enforcement describes the process of conciliation of complaints, the role of the Board of Inquiry, the usual terms of settlement, & the possibility of prosecution & fines. There is no functional division between the Commission's conciliation, enforcement & educ programs, & educ frequently plays an important part in the conciliation of complaints. The educ'al program is 3-fold: (A) publication & distribution of literature; (B) the establishment of working relationships with religious, labor voluntary assoc 's & municipal councils involved in combating prejudice & discrimination; (C) sponsorship of meetings with employee, ethnic & immigrant groups. Major assistance has been given to local communities affected by racial tension or strife. A further educ'al program involves obtaining specific voluntary agreements signed & implemented among employers, employment agencies, apartment developers & real estate interests. Res by Ontario U's is sponsored by the Commission into SE conditions of immigrant & minority groups in order to provide factual information to buttress the Commission's educ'al & enforcement program. AA.

Letter - Written by Ruth Gorman to an Ontario parliamentarian expressing her appreciation for his efforts in fighting the constitution on behalf of the west, Alberta (2 pages) ; WCC

Ontario has a system of fully funded yet independent network of community law clinics like those advocated in Rees' paper. Professor Mossman explores the forces that led to the establishment of the community clinics, their relationships to the judicare system and the purposes behind the government's assumption of responsibility for funding and defunding clinics: service to low income people, community involvement and representation and independence from funding sources. While Rees seems to suggest that government funded community clinics would automatically further these purposes, Mossman argues that scope of service, community involvement and funding decision processes must be structured very carefully in order to enhance clinics' abilities to engage in meaningful representation, and warns that the early community clinic movement could be easily subverted by concentrating decision making control over clinics in the hands of the government, the law society, the clinic or even of other community groups.