Alberta's HRC violates the Freedom of Information Act
Section 11 of Alberta’s Freedom of Information Act guarantees that, when an access to information request is made to the government:
The head of a public body must make every reasonable effort to respond to a request not later than 30 days after receiving it…
Got that? 30 days. It’s the law.
Well, it’s been 300 days since I filed a request under that legislation for all records that the Alberta Human Rights Commission has on me. You can see a copy of my original request right here. It’s dated February 14th.
They still haven’t handed over a single e-mail regarding me or my case.
They’ve handed over plenty of useless information – and billed me handsomely for it.
They have, inadvertently, given me some embarrassing information about their operation – that’s how, for example, I found out that 15 government bureaucrats and lawyers had been working on my case, for 900 days. (I like to joke that’s more investigators than work for Horatio Kane on CSI Miami.)
But as far as their notes on my case, their internal discussions about me, the things I actually asked for – none of it has been handed over.
I’ve appealed their stonewalling, higher and higher up the food chain. And I’ve appealed again. And today, my lawyers received a letter from the Information and Privacy Commissioner himself, advising that they’re going to need another 90 days to handle my case. You can see that letter, here. That will make it well over a year since I asked for their e-mails about me.
E-mails are pretty easy to dig up. Even if they’re deleted. It doesn’t take 300 days. It takes 30 minutes. The political excuse-making takes 300 days.
The e-mails are at the human rights commission. They just refuse to hand them over.
Gee. I wonder why that could be?
How bad must their e-mails (and other records that they’re refusing to disclose) be for the HRC to stall for so long?
What do you think they say about me, those HRC staff? When they’re not playing solitaire on the taxpayers’ dime, when they’re not hounding Christian pastors into recanting their faith, no doubt they wax quite colourfully about their critics.
I wonder what they say?
It’s obviously rough stuff. I think it’s a safe bet that, given the informal nature of e-mail, there was plenty of foul-mouthed language to describe me and my YouTube videos that brought the HRC into such international disrepute.
But that’s probably not enough for them to defy the law for a year.
I wonder if their resident Muslim separatist, Arman Chak, had a few choice words about me?
I wonder what Shirlene McGovern, my interrogatrix, said?
It’s not the insults that I’m really after – though those would be fascinating to see.
It’s the abuse of process. The malicious prosecution. The proof – in their own words – that the HRC is not a real court by any stretch. It’s a kangaroo court. It’s a tool for political punishment.
I want to see them say so.
I want to read their casual conversations about it.
I want to see their unguarded thoughts, jotted to one another in e-mails.
Insults can be glossed over, politically – a few fake apologies, grudgingly issued, would be the ordinary procedure.
But if the HRC’s internal e-mails showed a conspiracy to flout the law and persecute me – well, that’s a whole different story than just an insult or two, isn’t it?
That’s civil suit time – maybe even criminal prosecution time.
That’s scandalous resignation time.
Which is why, when March 16th rolls around, something tells me the HRC will ask for yet another delay.
Or – surprise! – they’ll find that their computer server crashed, and all the e-mails were accidentally deleted.
Rule of law? That’s for the little people.
The Alberta HRC says it’s above the Charter of Rights – that’s how they convicted Rev. Stephen Boissoin for the crime of preaching. And now we know they think they’re above the province’s Freedom of Information laws, too.
Fire. Them. All.
Blogrolls
