TORONTO (June 4, 1996) - In an officially filed Freedom Of Information (FOI) Request, Freedom Party has requested a listing of the Ontario Human Rights Commission's expenses incurred with respect to its actions against London (former) landlord Elijah Elieff.

Filed on Fp's behalf by Fp member and past-candidate (Oxford) Jim Montag, the requested expense listings relate to three specific actions taken by the OHRC: (1) expenses incurred in the initial investigation of the filed complaint, (2) expenses incurred at the Board of Inquiry level, and (3) expenses incurred to date at the appeal level (see related story).

"Please be advised that the Commission has no record with respect to the expenses incurred in investigating this case," replied Roger Palacio, the OHRC's Coordinator for Freedom Of Information and Protection of Privacy, in an October 3 written response to Montag.

He further went on to report that Keith Norton, Chief Commissioner of the OHRC, made a decision not to disclose monies spent on its Board of Inquiry hearings and on its current appeal, citing grounds that such information is subject to a "solicitor-client" privilege exempted under section 19 of the Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act, 1987.

"Based on the premise that the Commission conducted an adequate investigation prior to the initiation of the Board of Inquiry hearing, I cannot and will not accept your statement that you have no records," responded Montag. "This is taxpayer money, and taxpayers have every right to insist upon such an accounting. Surely you jest when you state that you have no records."

But the Commission apparently is not jesting. In a subsequent follow-up to Montag's comments, Palacio simply stated that "we note your objections and reiterate our letter of October 3, 1996."

However, in addition to its refusal to provide financial information to Freedom Party, the OHRC has also totally ignored and failed to respond to other non-financial information requested.

In addressing the OHRC's "solicitor-client privilege" argument, Montag noted:

"It is my understanding that the Commission is required to operate in a completely impartial manner and therefore cannot be party to a solicitor-client relationship within the context of a filed complaint. To whom are you referring as the solicitor? To whom are you referring as the client?

"(You have) clearly indicat(ed) that the Human Rights Commission does not keep financial records with respect to its investigations. Could you please advise me what section of what Act empowers you to NOT keep records such as this?"

So far, the OHRC has completely ignored these questions and has only acknowledged the official Information Request, as it must do by law.

e-mail

Page last updated on April 28, 2002