U of O Watch mission, in the words of Foucault...

"One knows … that the university and in a general way, all teaching systems, which appear simply to disseminate knowledge, are made to maintain a certain social class in power; and to exclude the instruments of power of another social class. … It seems to me that the real political task in a society such as ours is to criticise the workings of institutions, which appear to be both neutral and independent; to criticise and attack them in such a manner that the political violence which has always exercised itself obscurely through them will be unmasked, so that one can fight against them." -- Foucault, debating Chomsky, 1971.

U of O Watch mission, in the words of Socrates...

"An education obtained with money is worse than no education at all." -- Socrates

video of president allan rock at work

Showing posts with label human rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human rights. Show all posts

Monday, April 25, 2016

And again



Allan Rock is being himself. Fire an entire hockey team in one case. Don't accommodate a single student for one course in another. Instead, force the student to go legal. That's in character.

University accused of discrimination for requiring dyslexic student to take course in French

Critics say human rights law trumps University of Ottawa's tradition of bilingualism

By Erica Johnson, CBC News Posted: Apr 25, 2016 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Apr 25, 2016 7:54 AM ET

The Student Federation of the University of Ottawa says it has seen many cases where the university has 'failed to provide adequate accommodations.' (CBC)

(Editor's note: We are back. Sorry that we missed March.)
Also follow us on Facebook.

Wednesday, December 2, 2015

New president named to fill Allan Rock's shoes: Speech-regulation-law administrator Jacques Frémont


The next president will be: Jacques Frémont. From Allan Rock's overt Zionism to a new social engineering for speech regulation. Progress never ends.

The U of O put out its announcement today: HERE.

The media are invited to attend a ceremony on Friday: LINK.

Mr. Jacques Frémont's official U of O bio is HERE.


At first sight, the new direction could signal a coming SPEECH CODE (code of conduct) for campus...? Mr. Frémont is a champion of expressly victimless "hate speech" provisions in provincial human rights codes:

Interviewer: "Imagine the situation where... a young man who is intimidated by his classmates because he's Muslim, for example, in what way will the addition you are making to the Quebec Charter of Rights help him, will protect him?"

JF: "Technically, if it's one young man who gets intimidated because he's Muslim, that's already covered by the Charter -- you are quite right. It's when we have general statements -- general, hateful statements, inciting hatred, etc. -- where there is no particular, individual victim -- it's the group in general that is the victim -- that's what we're targeting with this addition."




National Post View: Quebec hate speech bill would re-establish bureaucratic despotism:::

The bill takes its inspiration from recommendations made public by the QHRC in November 2014. Jacques Frémont, the commission’s president, explained that he planned to use the requested powers to sue those critical of certain ideas, “people who would write against … the Islamic religion … on a website or on a Facebook page.”

Frémont is an unabashed legal activist, who sees the QHRC’s mandate as “provoking a social change” and “making the law.” ...

The details of Bill 59 are chilling. Article 6 would “give the QHRC the power to initiate legal proceedings before the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal without having to wait for complaints from the public.” Article 3 allows members of an identifiable group as well as people outside the group to make complaints triggering suits for hate speech before the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal.

Canada: The Spanish Inquisition Makes a Comeback:::


  • Some readers will remember the disputes during the last decade when the journalists were hauled before the farcical "Human Rights Commissions" of Canada and asked to explain why they had ever said anything that the state commissars did not agree with. Best of all is that the members of the Commission do not have to wait for anybody to complain to them before they act.
  • The Commission is allowed to head out all by itself and search for things that are offensive. One must wonder whether it may just – wholly unforeseeably – be a government department which continuously finds work to justify its existence?
  • The Tribunal is planning to keep a publicly available list of people found guilty of "hate speech" — like a sex-offender database. Presumably this means that members of the public can check that they are not living in the proximity of anybody who is likely to express him-or-herself with words.
  • I am sure that Monsieur Fremont will agree that the safest thing to do is either not to report an attack on the Canadian Parliament or to ensure that all papers or individuals who mention such an attack are immediately fined $10,000 and put on the Hate-Speech-offenders list for doing so.
  • The Human Rights Tribunal will be able to decide on each occasion how much money it wants. Might it not in fact be more convenient for the Tribunals if they simply put all writers on a system of direct-debit and levy the fine on absolutely everyone after any terrorist attack?
  • We had hoped that the country had learned that for most of the civilized world, blasphemy laws are meant to be a thing of the past. But after the latest events in Quebec, we will no longer be fooled. The whole world will be able to see that in Canada blasphemy laws are a thing of the future.

Monday, February 3, 2014

Supreme Court of Canada now has all documents in hand to fix Rancourt's unresolved judicial bias complaint


AN EARLIER POST describes Denis Rancourt's recent filing of an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, to fix a complaint of judicial bias.

The application gave rise to responses from the respondent Joanne St. Lewis and from the responding party University of Ottawa. Rancourt filed his replies to these responses today (February 3, 2014). The file is now nominally complete for a determination by a panel of three supreme court judges.

The St. Lewis response is posted HERE, or PDF.
The University of Ottawa response is posted HERE, or PDF.
Rancourt's replies are posted HERE, or PDF.

Rancourt essentially argues that if the Supreme Court of Canada refuses to grant an appeal, then Canada will have violated its international obligations to provide an impartial court in civil matters, pursuant to two international agreements:

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 10
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Article 14(1)
1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. ...

Rancourt also argues that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms itself requires that the appeal on the basis of the judicial bias complaint must be heard, because, he argues, access to an impartial court is a Charter right of every individual by virtue of s. 15(1):

Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Rancourt points out that the French text of the Charter (s. 15(1)) is unambiguous on the guarantee of access to an impartial court:

La loi ne fait acception de personne et s’applique également à tous, et tous ont droit à la même protection et au même bénéfice de la loi, indépendamment de toute discrimination, notamment des discriminations fondées sur la race, l’origine nationale ou ethnique, la couleur, la religion, le sexe, l’âge ou les déficiences mentales ou physiques.


Court documents in the overall action and its appeals are HERE.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Canadian university presidents concerned about human rights choose their battles


At a time when Israel, backed by the US and Canada's power elite, is calling for all-out war to destroy Iran; even having a US Zionist pundit call-out in the media for US president Obama to be assassinated by Israel if he won’t attack Iran (Globe and Mail LINK)...

At a time when a major regional war is threatened to satisfy Israeli regime ambitions...

What better time for two university presidents, two champions of Canadian-government-sanctioned human rights advocacy, Allan Rock and Lloyd Axworthy, to point out (LINK, LINK) Iran's human rights violations against Iranian Baha'i educators who had their University of Ottawa degrees stripped from them by the Iranian government?

It is heartening to see these men of principle call out for the protection of human rights irrespective of the political circumstances.

In their own words: "Those who support human rights, who believe in access to education and who deplore repressive governments are increasingly speaking out ..."

Does this mean that we can soon expect our two academic champions of human rights to jointly and publicly denounce the lack of access to higher education for the occupied Palestinians of Gaza, mainly due to Israel bombing the schools, hospitals, and public health infrastructure...?

I hope so. But somehow I fear this will not occur soon.

[Note: This author does not minimize the human rights abuses of Iran or of any state, Canada included. But it seems to this author that influential citizens should be first concerned with the human rights abuses of their own nation and nation's allies, since that is where these concerned actors have the greatest potential influence and responsibility.]

Thursday, June 2, 2011

U of O neurosurgery malfeasance::: ALL SEVEN (7) employee and student unions denounce president's inaction


All the professional and student unions at the University of Ottawa have written a joint letter (co-signed by seven union presidents, sent today June 2, 2011) to the members of the Board of Governors and to the members of the university Senate denouncing the university's inaction in the overt malfeasance and reprisals case involving three medical residents who were targeted by the Faculty of Medicine.

See all related posts HERE.

This is an unprecedented action at the University of Ottawa indicating the malicious character of this prima facie case of administrative malfeasance and cover up, possibly involving criminal acts.

An accurate translation (from French) of the co-signed letter follows.


Re: Discrimination and reprisal complaints at the University of Ottawa

Dear members of the Board of Governors and of the Senate of the University of Ottawa,

As the representatives of the professional and student unions on campus, we wish to express in a unified voice our concern regarding certain events reported recently in the national and regional media. Three students in the Faculty of medicine appear to have complained for reason of discrimination and to have been subjected to significant academic and professional reprisals following the filing of these complaints. Emails made public have shown that at least one student was removed from his study program despite his excellent academic performance in order to deter other students from filing complaints.

As union bodies formed by a common interest to improve work and study conditions of our members which represent 95% of the university community, we insist on denouncing all practices intended to impose reprisals against those who decide to make complaints. Such a practice could, by creating a climate of fear and intimidation, incite our members to not demand their rights and protections foreseen by many federal and provincial laws as well as by our university policies. In addition, this practice is forbidden by the Human Rights Code of Ontario.

Our concerns are exacerbated by the existence of an official rule which guarantees, to each of our members, access to a transparent and fair process to make complaints without fear of reprisals.

Note that our organizations hereby commit, via our representation, to activate a serious follow up of the development of procedures and policies at the University of Ottawa concerning the cases of intimidation and reprisals to which our members can be subjected.

In the hope that this situation will be resolved as soon as possible, please receive, dear members of the Board of Governors and of the Senate, our distinguished salutations.

In solidarity,

Micheline Lessard – APUO [professors]
Greer Knox – APTPUO [part-time professors]
Amalia Savva – FEUO [undergraduate students]
Jonathan Duguay – GSAED [graduate students]
Marc Fortier – PIPSC [professional employees]
Richard Hogan – PSUO [support employees]
Félix Grenier – SCFP 2626 [teaching assistants]

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Yet another human rights tribunal case tied to U of O awaits adjudication

THIS Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) Interim Decision shows yet another tribunal case of racism connected with "Canada's university", not previously reported in the media.

Nusrat Saleem
Applicant
-and-

The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Dean Belway, Brian Henley, Debbie Hubble and Jason Kennedy
Respondents

[1] This is an Application filed on May 7, 2010 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended, (the “Code”). The applicant alleges that he was discriminated against on the basis of his race, colour, ancestry, place of origin and creed.
[2] The respondents have not filed a Response. By way of a Request for Order During Proceedings, filed July 6, 2010, they seek deferral of the Application pending the completion of a related grievance proceeding. This Interim Decision deals with the respondents’ Request.
more...

Friday, April 29, 2011

Report on racism at the School of Nursing - today's press conference and Michaelle Jean

[April 29, 2011, press conference participants]

The Centre for Equity and Human Rights (CEHR) of the Student Federation of the University of Ottawa (SFUO) held its press conference about the racism in the U of O School of Nursing today.

The CEHR has received twenty racism discrimination complaints from students in the School of Nursing since 2009.

The press conference testimonies by two plaintiffs were detailed and disturbing.

There can be no doubt that Nursing has an urgent and widespread racism problem that has been disregarded for years by the university administration.

The lawyer for the plaintiffs Yavar Hameed stressed that the problem was not only from bad management but was also systemic, pointing to a lack of internal structures to solve and correct racism problems.

Unlike previous press conferences at the University of Ottawa, the university communication staff and legal counsel were nowhere to be seen on the floor. Instead, they have installed a new electronic lock on their main door and called the media behind closed doors for private conferences.

The presenters avoided naming the six university staff complained against in the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario complaints but Student Appeal Centre director Mireille Gervais had the following statements for UofOWatch.

"[Professor] Isabelle Cyr is a problem regarding differential treatment of Nursing students based on the colour of their skin."

"Kirsten Woolend, ex-director of the School of Nursing, acknowledged in 2008 -- at a meeting with me, CEHR director Francine Page, SFUO VP-University Seamus Wolfe, vice-dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences Francis Reardon, and School of Nursing administrator of undergraduate programs Joanne Larose-Dubois -- that the School of Nursing had received many complaints about Isabelle Cyr."

"It is a widely known fact that Isabelle Cyr once physically shook [assaulted] a black Nursing student."

As the event was closing, former Governor General Michaelle Jean, who now has her UNESCO office beside university president Allan Rock's office, happened by accident to walk by and stopped to chat with some of the plaintiffs. Jean inquired why they were in Tabaret Hall. After some explanation Jean asked CEHR director Francine Page to send her all the documents so she can prepare for a possible informal chat with Rock. Maybe Rock will listen to Jean? He hasn't listened to anyone else.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Rampant racism at the U of O School of Nursing::: Press conference announced



The Centre for Equity and Human Rights (CEHR) of the Student Federation of the University of Ottawa (SFUO) has announced that it will hold a press conference about the racism in the U of O School of Nursing:

PRESS CONFERENCE
Friday April 29, 2011
11 AM
Entrance rotunda, Tabaret Hall
550 Cumberland

Former School of Nursing students Anne Mpinda and Victor Ndayishimiye have each filed detailed human rights complaints with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) against six teaching and administrative staff members at the school. They are represented by human rights lawyer Yavar Hameed.

The HRTO complaints are about racial discrimination and allege systemic discrimination, reprisals and intimidation; not unlike the recent high-profile cases in the U of O Faculty of Medicine, HERE.

The CEHR also confirms that it has received no less than twenty such similar reports from students in the School of Nursing since the fall of 2009.

The director of the CEHR, Francine Page, had sounded the alarm in 2007 and followed this with an expert report to the University in February 2010. Page was disturbed to find her concerns and report effectively ignored by the University of Ottawa, under its president Allan Rock administration.

The University propaganda touts Rock as a "defender of human rights" "putting the University at the service of the world". It would be better to put itself at the service of its students, especially those being discriminated against.

The CEHR press release comes only weeks after Allan Rock's university senate brazenly repudiated a motion to reaffirm its commitment to a discrimination-free academic environment, in an effort to prevent exactly these types of problems, HERE.

Needless to say, the Student Appeal Centre's (SAC) 2008 public report about systemic racism at the University of Ottawa, that the Rock administration took great pains to deny and defame (HERE), now echos loudly in the hollow halls of this racist institution.

On his next mission abroad, Rock could save a lot of folks a lot of pain by plainly stating: "If you're black or brown avoid applying." Or, he could start actually standing for human rights by ordering immediate reparations where reparations are due rather than fight lengthy and costly denials of the obvious -- as the University shamefully continues to do.



Update: Senate member Joseph Hickey is following up with university senate, HERE. The University of Ottawa ("Canada's university" in its propaganda) is rather unique in Canada for not having a policy against harassment and discrimination. This absence of protection has repeatedly been denounced by the SEHR and SAC of the SFUO.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

U of O video released::: Senate dignity hits Rock-bottom -- Breach of Criminal Code

We reported about the University of Ottawa Senate meeting of April 4, 2011, in the previous post HERE. And now the university has released its video of the meeting:


It's actually worst than our original blog report. Words cannot express the disrespect and pettiness displayed by president Allan Rock and most senators shown in this video.

It's unbelievable. In the past, such contempt for collegiality and due process would not have been displayed in public, much less on video.

This video was released on the same day that the graduate student association (GSAED) sent a damning letter to the university administration and to all senate members precisely about the human rights matter in question. See the GSAED letter HERE.

Among other offenses, executives in the Faculty of Medicine colluded in terminating a medical resident with the intent to compel the resident and other employees to abstain from providing information to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. (LINK)(LINK)(LINK)

The latter is a criminal offense pursuant to the Criminal Code of Canada. Allan Rock himself is collaborating in the crime by not immediately rectifying the dismissal; in light of the evidence from leaked emails.

These are the same leaked emails that student senator Joseph Hickey was trying to distribute at Senate (see above video). Allan Rock has known about the emails at least since the day they were leaked: He was a recipient - HERE.

Monday, April 4, 2011

U of O Senate repudiates human rights motion


After the Ann Coulter fiasco the University of Ottawa Senate, under the leadership of president Allan Rock, reaffirmed its commitment to freedom of expression: HERE.

After the human rights reprisals against three medical residents (LINK) the University of Ottawa Senate, under the leadership of president Allan Rock... ... ... repudiated a motion to reaffirm its commitment to a discrimination-free academic environment?

Yes, it happened at today's meeting of Senate.

THIS MOTION was considered too perturbing (?) for even a single member of Senate to second it so it could be discussed despite presidents Rock's obvious antagonism.

The three medical residents were present to speak to the motion but their contribution had been disallowed by Rock even before Senate could be consulted: HERE, HERE.

(The impolite way that the MDs themselves had been rebuffed by Rock is even more disturbing...)

This is a very low day for the University of Ottawa.

Especially in contrast to what would be needed in the form of leadership given the disturbing circumstances including criminal reprisals exposed by the Neuroleaks emails made public on the internet: HERE.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

March 9th Faculty of Medicine malfeasance press conference -- video report




Vicious reprisals in the Faculty of Medicine::: U of O damage-control spin insufficient


Systemic racism in the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, has been exposed via leaked emails and at a press conference yesterday and is national news today: Globe and Mail.

The press conference was attended by all the major radio, TV and press media in Ottawa and followed THIS press release.

In 2008 when the Student Appeal Centre (SAC) of the student union first publicly exposed the problem of systemic racism at the University of Ottawa, the university's response was a campaign of denigration and cover up personally managed by president Allan Rock, as seen in access to information documents obtained by the SAC (HERE and HERE and links therein).

At the Wednesday press conference in the rotunda of the central administration building, president Allan Rock - as usual for hot issues of public concern - was nowhere to be found (although he had been invited) but an eight-person university legal and public relations team was buzzing with activity.

Their mission was to develop and deliver the University spin - the optimized tactical message that would minimize the university's responsibility.

Their previous (2008) university reaction (to deny, denigrate, and cover up) was now evidently a failure.

In addition, the University was now exposed to an even greater threat than being shown to be racist: Some of its top officials in the Faculty of Medicine participated in vicious reprisal against at least one talented MD, for filing an internal human rights complaint and as a way to quell possible external complaints. In particular, see THIS leaked email:

Eve [Dr. Eve Tsai],

It is uncertain whether Al-Ghaithy et al. would take this matter further to an external body such as the Human Rights Tribunal. However, I can predict with certainty that fixing Al-Ghaithy would deter the others from doing so. I have had discussions with the Dean and Chief of Surgery and the consensus is that Al-Ghaithy must be removed. Over the last few months I have been working closely with Dr. Worthington and Dr. Bragg, and let me assure you that we are not that far. You have to appreciate here that we are dealing with a strong resident and probably the best we have, at least from an academic perspective. This together with his popularity among the residents made some of the conventional methods unsuccessful.

At the end of the day the University will not sacrifice one of its faculty members for the sake of few disgruntled out-funded residents, and I doubt it very much that the other complainants would prosecute you outside the campus in a process that is naturally protracted and financially draining.

Rick [Dr. Richard Moulton, Association Professor University of Ottawa; Chair, Division of Neurosurgery University of Ottawa; Chief, Division of Neurosurgery The Ottawa Hospital; Program Director, Division of Neurosurgery]

The university's final spin solution was a damage-control compromise: Turn attention away from the grotesque malfeasance of its Faculty of Medicine officials by admitting that the allegations of racist discrimination are "very serious" and by turning attention towards the Human Rights Tribunal process: "The university feels that's the proper forum where we will speak out."

Turn attention away from the illegal reprisals practiced by Moulton and several others (Dean of Medical School, Paul Bragg Associate Dean PGME, Chief of Surgery Eric Paulin, Jim Worthington TOH VP-Medical Affairs) and towards an examination of the allegations of racist discrimination.

Brilliant! But somehow the elephant in the room may confront Allan Rock sooner than he would like. At the moment, Richard Moulton's actions are not even subject to an internal discipline investigation. He would have been in more trouble if he had given high grades to some "out-sourced" medical residents...?

Youtube videos of the press conference and its question period are being uploaded by university senator Joseph Hickey who has taken the matter to university Senate. Here is the presentation by the plaintiffs' spokesperson and co-plaintiff Dr. Khalid Aba-Alkhail:

Sunday, March 6, 2011

Three medical doctors jointly file human rights complaints against the University of Ottawa and several officials -- PRESS RELEASE

U of O's systemic racism confirmed in spades


Dr. Waleed AlGhaithy (Neurosurgery Residency Program, University of Ottawa), Dr. Khalid Aba-Alkhail (Cardiac Surgery Residency Program) and Dr. Ms. Manal Al-Saigh (same) have filed Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario complaints against the University of Ottawa and several officials.

They are represented by freedom of expression and human rights lawyer Douglas Christie. (video-1) (video-2)

A joint press conference will be held at 10:30am on Wednesday March 9, 2011, in the entrance rotunda of Tabaret Hall (central administration building), 550 Cumberland Ave., University of Ottawa. [FACEBOOK EVENT LINK]

Discrimination, reprisal, and intimidation are alleged on the basis of evidence filed with the Tribunal.

Dr. Aba-Alkail affirms that Senator Dr. Wilbert Keon, Dr. Paul Bragg, Dr. James Worthington, Dr. Thierry Mesana, and others collectively intimidated him behind closed doors to drop a legal reparation case under threat of career obliteration.

The evidence for reprisal and targeting is unambiguous in the form of emails between hospital executives, including emails leaked by an inside source and sent to hundreds of faculty and residents.

For example, on July 11, 2009, Chairman of Neurosurgery Richard Moulton wrote to Dr. Paul Bragg (Associate Dean PGME) and Dr. James Worthington (VP Medical Affairs of TOH) about plaintiff Dr. AlGaithy:

“If the [discrimination] complaint against [Dr. Eve Tsai] is dismissed there are going to have to be some significant consequences for the involved parties (dismissal/suspension) or we are going to be facing this ad infinitum.”


AlGaithy was summarily dismissed despite his outstanding academic and professional standing.

The March 9th press conference is organized by the Student Appeal Centre (SAC) of the Student Federation University of Ottawa (SFUO), following the SAC’s 2008 report about systemic racism at the University of Ottawa.

- 30 -

For more information about the press conference please contact:
Mireille Gervais, LL.L.
Director, Student Appeal Centre, SFUO
Case.cresac@sfuo.ca

[Photo: Dr. Khalid Aba-Alkhail and Dr. Waleed AlGhaithy]

Saturday, August 1, 2009

U of O’s discovery of instant psychological evaluations: Mineralogist dean wants all the credit


Recall that back in 2007 the University of Ottawa’s dean of the Faculty of Science André E. Lalonde, who is a mineralogist by training, made a fundamental advance in labour management by spontaneously developing a capacity for instant psychological evaluations of his academic staff [LINK].
..
Such progress in management methods can only be of use to society at large if it is shared into the public domain so that other managers can learn these skills. Therefore, UofOWatch investigated this development in human knowledge by making an access to information (ATI) request on April 30, 2008, to identify all records (emails, letters, notes, reports, etc.) related in the broad sense to the dean’s September 6, 2007, LETTER [LINK].
..
The University was obliged by law to search for the requested records and to provide them within 30 days. The University replied on May 15, 2008, that “Access is denied to your request since no such records exist.
..
UofOWatch appealed the University’s denial of access to the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) of Ontario on June 4, 2008. The appeal was accepted and the case went into mediation. Mediation lasted more than one year and was terminated with the Mediation Report. On July 30, 2009, the case was then moved to adjudication.
..
It is the position of UofOWatch that any “mediation privilege” should not be used as a pretext to prevent unethical or illegal behaviours of institutions from being disclosed.
..
As is shown in the Mediator’s Report and supporting documents (available to media and investigators on request), during mediation the University, in the person of Pamela Harrod, first reaffirmed its position that “no records exist.
..
The University informed the Mediator that the dean had initiated the LETTER on his own initiative and based entirely on informal verbal conversations with one or more colleagues in the hallways or in his office: The dean had no respondent records.
..
At this point, the University also informed the Mediator that it was prepared to ask the dean to state his position in an affidavit.
..
Wow. Taken at face value, this means that the dean had discovered a way to single-handedly perform a psychological evaluation based entirely on hearsay, of sufficient reliability to write a formal letter insinuating a mental health problem. [From a statistical perspective, given the nature of hallway conversations in academia, the dean presumably would have sent out many such letters?]
..
However, it was not that simple.
..
UofOWatch then asked the Mediator to indeed secure the proposed affidavit and to also secure affidavits of non-involvement from those that the dean might have consulted, such as Pamela Harrod (VP-Governance), Legal Counsel, Robert Major (VP-Academic), and Louise Pagé-Valin (Human Resources). The Mediator also transmitted a list of thirteen University offices where respondent records might be found.
..
At this point, the University refused to provide any affidavits and instead provided an index of eleven respondent records that it now mysteriously found, some four months into the process.
..
The University has refused to provide the records themselves but the index shows that the records are emails between the dean, Major, Michelle Flaherty (Legal Counsel), Pagé-Valin, and others, exchanged mainly during June and July 2007, in obvious preparation for the September 6, 2007, LETTER. Several exchanges have the index subject line “A different tact?”
..
Since Legal Counsel Flaherty is involved in virtually all the emails, it is difficult to understand how her immediate supervisor Pamela Harrod could repeatedly report in the name of the University that “no such records exist,” while required by law to search for and produce all records within 30 days.
..
Oh my my, so the dean, although he does not like to admit it, needs at least a lawyer and his immediate supervisor the VP-Academic to accomplish his feat of psychoanalysis? What is most surprising is the length to which the University is prepared to go in order to not disclose its secret of newfound management abilities.
..
It appears that the dean was prepared to lie to cover the whole mess, but that asking everyone involved to lie under oath (in affidavits) was too much.
..
The next questions are:
  • Will the University be ordered to perform another search?
  • Will the University be ordered to disclose some or all of the found records?
  • Will the IPC Adjudicator use her legal powers to get to the bottom of the case?
  • Will the records be disclosed by a parallel legal adventure or investigation?
..
And finally, will those involved in subverting the ATI law in Ontario (FIPPA) suffer any consequences?
..
[Photo credits: Andre E. Lalonde, comet; University of Ottawa, Andre E. Lalonde.]

Saturday, February 28, 2009

U of O protects the campus visual environment from inflammatory material capable of inciting confrontation

In the interest of creating a sterile zone where students are free to develop and grow…?
.
(Don’t miss President Allan Rock’s upcoming March 5th lecture entitled “Canadian Perspectives”.)
.
From the media office of the University of Ottawa:
.
"News Releases & Announcements
Statement regarding Posting Regulations"
.
"OTTAWA, February 23, 2009 — Under University of Ottawa policies, the administration has the right and the responsibility to ensure that all posters comply with the Posting Regulations before they are displayed on a bulletin board owned by the University. The regulations set out principles to be applied in considering such requests.
.
One of the posters in relation to Israeli Apartheid Week was found to be inconsistent with our posting regulations for reasons that included the use of an image that was inflammatory and capable of inciting confrontation."

Monday, April 7, 2008

Discrimination at York University


The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) has recently completed its Case Analysis Report, in the case of Professor David F. Noble versus York University and Robert Drummond, Lorna Marsden, and Patricia Bradshaw, in the matter of "the respondents afford[ing] privileged accommodation to Jewish students at the respondent university (York) with regard to observance of religious holidays."


The Report's conclusion is unambiguous: "The university's practice of not scheduling classes on Jewish high holy days clearly results in differential treatment on the basis of creed, in that individuals in one group (those of Jewish faith) are given preferential treatment over others."


The full report is available HERE.

Monday, March 17, 2008

Oli Cosgrove to Minister of Education - UofO Campus Arrests

January 10, 2008
The Hon. John Molloy,
Minister, Training, Colleges & Universities,
900 Bay Street,
3rd Floor,
Mowat Building,
Toronto, ON M7A lL2.
.
Dear Mr. Molloy,
.
I’m writing to express to you my worry and disgust at attitudes and actions on the part of the University of Ottawa’s Executive that have recently come to my attention.
.
Firstly, at the Executive’s instigation, police arrested three Ottawa residents on the university’s campus early last December. The two women and one man had attended a public Faculty of Science Council meeting there last May in support of a second year for an activism course. The university allowed the course’s first year only after nine months of intensive lobbying. After the May meeting, the three were served with trespass notices. That alone was an insolent act. However, it was unenforced until one of the three submitted an agenda item to the Faculty Council for a December meeting.
.
The women were arrested on campus on December 6. The man was arrested on December 8, told he was trespassing on private property, and was escorted off campus in his wheelchair by three City of Ottawa police officers and several University security guards. He had offered to leave before the police arrived but was restrained so police could serve him with a summons. He is to appear in court on January 31. At least one of the women has vowed to take the matter to the Supreme Court, if necessary.
.
The attached article provides further details on this matter. [See LINKS below.]
.
Since when, Mr. Molloy, are universities, supported by public funds, private property? And, if public meetings are held on campus, how is a member of the public to know whether they are or are not allowed to attend them; whether they will or won’t be served with trespass notices should they attend them?
.
Furthermore, these arrests blatantly contravene the University’s “Vision 2010 Academic Strategic Plan.” In ‘Our Vision” under that plan, the University states that it is “an integral part of its community, open to the world, and distinguished by … its high-quality learning environment, its passion for knowledge and innovation …. its openness to diversity ….”
.
My second concern: the University’s Executive seems determined to eliminate Ottawa Cinema Politica (OCP), a Friday evening film course open to the public, given by Professor Denis Rancourt. I attend as many of these evenings as possible, there is seldom an empty seat, and sometimes there is standing room only. The Executive has tried before on false pretexts to put a stop to them. It is trying again, this year by claiming that the sessions are not part of Prof. Rancourt’s workload.

Either the Executive can’t read, has no memory, or has ulterior motives for its actions because these sessions have been repeatedly included as part of his workload in Prof. Rancourt’s annual reports and in other official past records. Additionally, it is part of a professor’s responsibility to provide community service, and Prof. Rancourt is committed to these sessions.

Up to now, the University has always provided an auditorium and projection equipment for these sessions. Now, however, it has made the auditorium difficult to book, and has refused to provide sign language access for the deaf community members, contravening the Ontario Human Rights Code.

This second heavy-handed action on the part of the University Executive again contravenes the University’s Vision 2010. In “Our Values” under the plan, the University states that it “values its community … encourages freedom of expression in an atmosphere of open dialogue, enabling critical thought, supported by intellectual integrity and ethical judgment.”

It is my observation, Mr. Malloy, that University President Gilles Patry and his Executive are trying to dictate which courses can and cannot be offered, and who can and cannot attend them. These actions of theirs make a mockery not only of the University’s Vision 2010, but also of the whole purpose of a university. It appears to me that the President and Executive are, therefore, unfit to head up any academic institution, particularly one supported by tax dollars.

I hope, Mr. Minister, that you will investigate these occurrences at the University of Ottawa. I know only of the incidents which I’ve mentioned here, but there may be others like them. We cannot allow leaders of our academic institutions to practice even the slightest repression of academic and civic freedoms. Apart from the repression, what sort of example does it set for our youth? Do we want them graduating with the impression that repression and dictatorship are acceptable?

Yours sincerely,
_____________
Oli Cosgrove

cc: Mme. Madeleine Meilleur
Prof. Denis Rancourt
The Ottawa Citizen
The Ottawa Sun
LaPress

Enc: letter to President Patry
article by Prof. Rancourt

LINKS
.
[Photo credit: From Minister's government web page.]