The repercussions of the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Ward case go well beyond the particular situation of the comedy show from which it originated, as explained by the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse last month. last, when it announced a refocusing of its handling of complaints related to allegedly discriminatory remarks.
Thus, dozens of complaint files which mainly concern racist and homophobic insults had to be closed because, according to the framework established by the Supreme Court, they no longer fall within the investigative jurisdiction of the Commission or the Human Rights Tribunal of the person. Indeed, it is now necessary that the remarks be made in a situation of discriminatory harassment or during an exclusion from a service, a refusal of housing, a situation of racial profiling or a loss of employment. for a complaint to be admissible to the Commission.
This reframing of the right to recourse to discrimination by the Supreme Court raises serious concerns among people who are the subject of stigmatizing, even dehumanizing remarks. To this end, the vast majority of complaints related to remarks received at the Commission concern racist remarks containing the n-word expressed in a virulent and degrading manner towards black and racialized people in various interactions. The situation is particularly worrying according to the Commission.
People today continue to be subjected to derogatory remarks or offensive remarks on the basis of personal characteristics. Speeches and gestures of a discriminatory, racist, xenophobic and homophobic nature are part of a continuum: individual; systemic and societal, hence the importance of combating these deleterious phenomena, as seen in the work of the Commission as well as numerous university and institutional studies on the issue.
Serious consequences
Disparaging remarks reflect stereotypes towards historically disadvantaged groups that continue to experience situations of discrimination and racism and can therefore have serious consequences. They can damage the self-esteem of the people they target by spreading the idea that their humanity is of lesser value.
These experiences can leave deep scars and arouse feelings of fear and exclusion, in total opposition to the spirit of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. Speeches imbued with racism, homophobia, transphobia, sexism or ageism can affect the sense of belonging of the people concerned to the rest of society as well as their sense of security.
Also, remarks based on stereotypes can alter the bond of trust between the people who are the target and the rest of society. There is also a risk of trivialization of speech that conveys intolerance and hatred, ie a loss of sensitivity among the general public with regard to the effects thereof. Ultimately, it is the possibilities of living together and the creation of social ties that are reduced. This problem is therefore not only that of disadvantaged groups, but is more broadly the responsibility of the community as a whole.
More than ever, we must now turn to the origin and purpose of the Charter in order to better understand the consequences of the Supreme Court’s decision. We must therefore remember the role associated with dignity in the structure of human rights and freedoms in Quebec.
The purpose of the Charter, said the 1974 press release that accompanied the tabling of the bill that led to its creation, was “to solemnly affirm the fundamental rights and freedoms of the person so that they may be guaranteed by the collective will and better protected against any violation, [de] regulate relations between citizens on the basis of human dignity and [de] determine the rights and faculties, the whole of which is necessary for the development of the personality of each human being”.
The Commission’s commitment
Despite the reframing of its investigative power in terms of statements, the Commission’s commitment to ensuring compliance with the principles set out in the Charter remains intact. The Commission is indeed determined to continue its work of investigation, research, education, information and cooperation.
More broadly, the Commission wishes to challenge all of Quebec society, so that everyone takes the proper measure of the situation that has arisen and finds ways to respond judiciously to the major breach made in the edifice of rights and freedoms.
Let us collectively not lose sight of the objective of equal dignity at the heart of this fundamental law and the protection that has been given to dignity over the past decades.