|
Gender is part of the Equality program. You can find more information about it on its main program page. |
|
|
Gender
By Communications on March 26, 2012
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association generally supports the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The CCLA believes the decision goes some way towards making the lives of prostitutes safer. Specifically, CCLA agrees with the decision to strike down the common bawdy house provision. The evidence before the Court of Appeal was clear that persons engaged in prostitution are safer working indoors than on the street. CCLA also generally agrees with the Court of Appeal’s decision to read into the living on the avails provision an exception for non-exploitative commercial relationships between prostitutes and bodyguards, drivers and other persons who could assist prostitutes to remain safer. However, CCLA agrees with the minority decision of Justices MacPherson and Cronk that equality values should inform the analysis of gross disproportionality with respect to the communicating provisions. CCLA strongly supports the view that persons, especially vulnerable persons who face pre-existing disadvantages, should be able to protect themselves. This is especially true of street-based prostitutes who the minority recognized have “very few alternative means of protecting themsevlves” from violence (para. 360). The safety of especially vulnerable persons engaged in prostitution greatly outweighs the government’s objective of limiting social nuisance. Finally, CCLA is pleased that the Court of Appeal accepted its submission that in the case of legislation which interferes with a person’s life, liberty or security of the person, there is no need to prove causation directly. That is, the applicant need not show that the impugned law directly caused the harm to the applicant’s life, liberty or security of the person.
By Noa Mendelsohn Aviv on November 18, 2011
CCLA has written to the Minister of Health of Prince Edward Island expressing concern about the lack of abortion services in the province. In its letter to the Minister, CCLA urges him to reassess the lack of access in light of the actual costs involved and the impact on girls and women who need this service. CCLA also urges the Minister to remove the procedural barrier facing girls and women who seek funding for out-of-province abortion – the requirement of doctors’ referrals. To read CCLA’s letter to the PEI Minister of Health, click here.
By Noa Mendelsohn Aviv on December 16, 2010
A private member’s bill aimed at creating a new offence around abortion (the crime of “coercion”) was defeated at second reading on December 15, 2010. The Bill was defeated by a vote of 178 against to 97 in favour. The Bill would have criminalized the act of “coercing” or attempting to “coerce” a female person into getting an abortion.
By Cara Zwibel on June 8, 2010
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association will present arguments before the Ontario Court of Appeal regarding whether a Muslim woman, who is a complainant in a sexual assault case, must remove her niqab in order to testify. A niqab is a garment, often worn for religious reasons, that covers the facial features below the eyes. Although the right to a fair trial is a fundamental right which the CCLA supports vigorously, it does not usually encompass permitting a defendant to prescribe how a witness may be dressed, seated or made comfortable in the context of trial proceedings. Scientific evidence indicates that facial cues are unreliable predictors of credibility – particularly in the context of cultural differences. CCLA will argue that, absent objective threats to fair trial rights, individuals should not be required to choose between following their religious beliefs, and accessing justice.
June 2, 2010
CCLA calls upon Minister of Foreign Affairs Lawrence Cannon to urgently intervene in the case of Nathalie Morin and her three minor children, trapped in Saudi Arabia. Ms. Morin and her three children are all Canadian citizens. CCLA has received information that Nathalie Morin is being severely mistreated and her life may be in danger. CCLA requests Canada to (1) ensure immediate investigation of these allegations; (2) immediately remove Nathalie Morin and her children to a place of safety; and (3) immediately procure independent Saudi legal advice for Ms Morin so she can protect herself and her children and exercise their human rights. CCLA believes Canada is legally obligated by the UN Charter, the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child — all ratified by Canada and by Saudi Arabia — to press Saudi Arabia to uphold the human rights of Ms. Morin and her children. Canada is further obligated by its own commitments pursuant to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to act to protect Nathalie Morin and her three children. Read more…
By Cara Zwibel on May 14, 2010
CCLA has submitted a brief to the Quebec Legislative Assembly expressing serious concerns about the constitutionality of Bill 94, proposed legislation that would require all those requesting a wide range of public services in Quebec to show their faces. As outlined in previous CCLA statements, the organization believes that the Bill is unnecessary, dangerously ambiguous, and would unjustifiably violate freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and the right to equality. CCLA’s brief expands on these points, and also outlines the dangerous precedent set by the bill, which is based on the assumption that the State may attach conditions to its duty to serve citizens, and establishes the principle that citizens have a duty to identify themselves to obtain the services of the State. Typically, it is the totalitarian state that randomly requires citizens to identify themselves, demands justification for their every-day activities, and places unnecessary, discriminatory conditions on the receipt of government services. Democratic countries, including Canada, should reject such measures.
By Cara Zwibel on March 31, 2010
Bill 94, tabled last week in Québec City, is entitled An Act to establish guidelines governing accommodation requests within the Administration and certain institutions. Its central provision, section 6, reads as follows: The practice whereby a personnel member of the Administration or an institution and a person to whom services are being provided by the Administration or the institution show their face during the delivery of services is a general practice. If an accommodation involves an adaptation of that practice and reasons of security, communication or identification warrant it, the accommodation must be denied. The Bill is applicable to all government sectors and to many public institutions, among them, daycare centres, public school boards and health facilities. In essence, the government is presuming that interacting with a woman wearing the niqab who works for the government or is seeking a governmental service is an undue burden. In our view, this general prohibition is vague, will lead to abuse and further marginalization, constitutes a denial of freedom of expression and religion, and is unnecessary. Read more…
September 1, 1995
In 1995, in anticipation of the repeal of Employment Equity Act, CCLA requested a meeting with the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation and outlining its concerns about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. |
|
|
Copyright © 2012 Canadian Civil Liberties Association - All Rights Reserved |
||