Catholic Education and Human Rights Legislation

Human Rights Legislation and Catholic Education

  • There is a perception that the Alberta Human Rights Commission's role sometimes conflicts with the purpose of Catholic education.
  • Catholic education aims to educate the whole student according to Catholic philosophy, theology, teachings, and Gospel principles, under the Bishop's guidance.
  • This perception is influenced by:
    • Section 11.1 of the Alberta Human Rights Act.
    • Section 16 of Bill 2 (proposed Education Act).
    • Complaints to the Commission about Catholic education administration.

History of Human Rights Legislation in Alberta

  • 1966: Alberta passed its first Human Rights Act.
  • 1972: The government introduced the Individual Rights Protection Act, creating the Human Rights Commission.
  • 1998: Sexual orientation was included as a protected ground due to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Vriend.
  • 2009: The legislation was renamed the Alberta Human Rights Act, and sexual orientation was officially added as a protected ground.
  • 2010: Section 11.1 was added, requiring school boards to notify parents when course material deals with religion, human sexuality, or sexual orientation, allowing parents to exclude students from such instruction.
  • 2012: Bill 2: Education Act, section 16, stated that all school courses must respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Alberta Human Rights Act.
    • This includes:
      • Section 2(a) of the Charter (freedom of conscience and religion, and freedom "from" religion).
      • Non-discrimination provisions of the Alberta Human Rights Act (religious beliefs, marital status, sexual orientation).

Goals of the Alberta Human Rights Act

  • Protect vulnerable persons from discrimination.
  • Provide equal opportunities for earning a living, finding housing, and accessing public services.
  • Foster equality.
  • Promote the principle that all persons are equal in dignity, rights, and responsibilities.
  • Promote respect for multicultural heritage.
  • Create an environment where everyone can participate in cultural, social, economic, and political life.
  • Encourage equality of opportunity.

Potential Conflicts

  • Conflicts arise when the goals of the Human Rights Act are interpreted in a way that weakens or abolishes Catholic social teaching in Catholic institutions.
  • Examples include complaints from non-Catholics seeking employment, services, or facility use from Catholic institutions in ways contrary to Catholic doctrine.
Specific Cases Mentioned
  • March 2008: A non-Catholic applicant for a secretary treasurer position was asked about comfort in a Catholic environment; the complaint was later abandoned.
  • October 2009: A transgender substitute teacher was removed from the substitute list after returning as a male; the complaint was initially dismissed but later ordered to a tribunal hearing.
  • December 2010: Four women complained about the lack of secular education in Morinville; the complaint continued despite the establishment of a secular public school board.
  • Complaints are contemplated regarding Catholic boards' decisions on HPV vaccine distribution and the use of gambling/casino revenues.

Legal Precedence Regarding Denominational Rights

  • Several cases address the conflict between denominational education rights and human rights legislation.
Key Cases
  • Re Casagrande (1987):
    • Section 29 of the Charter reaffirms constitutional rights for denominational schools.
    • These rights take precedence over individual rights protected by other Charter provisions.
    • The constitutional rights override individual rights and render the Individual Rights Protection Act inapplicable if it conflicts with a separate school board's right to dismiss for denominational cause.
  • Mahé (1990):
    • Section 29 of the Charter requires that any interpretation of section 23 (minority language rights) must be consistent with the rights and privileges of denominational schools.
  • An Act To Amend The Education Act (Bill 30) (1987):
    • Madam Justice Wilson: Charter and Human Rights provisions cannot render denominational education rights "an empty shell" or "hollow rights".
      *Bill 30 contravenes s. 15 and s. 2(a) of the Charter in that it provided full funding for Roman Catholic secondary schools but not for other secondary schools, denominational or non-denominational, in the province.
    • Section 93(1) rights are immune from Charter review under section 29.
    • Section 29 emphasizes that the special treatment guaranteed to denominational schools is not impaired by the Charter.
      *Section 29 is there to render immune from Charter review rights or privileges which would otherwise, ie., but for s. 29 be subject to such review
    • Mr. Justice Estey: The real contest is between the operation of the Charter and the integrity of section 93.
      *Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, s. 93 is a part of the Constitution of Canada.
    • Section 93 is a fundamental constitutional provision for sharing sovereign power.
    • The Charter cannot render unconstitutional distinctions expressly permitted by the Constitution Act, 1867.
      *Section 93(1), or legislation for the protection of the rights imbedded by s. 93(1) or legislation contemplated by s. 93(3).
  • Hall (2002):
    • Denominational education rights may only be given effect in the face of a breach of section 15 of the Charter if the right claimed goes to the essential denominational nature of the school.

Conclusion

  • When there is a conflict between denominational educational rights protected by section 93(1) of the Constitution Act, 1867, or section 17(1) of the Alberta Act or Saskatchewan Act 1905, Human Rights legislation and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms may not be used to defeat those essential denominational educational rights.