The Lynch List, 30-Mar-2011

First: A great editorial by Daniel Lublin on two of the many tragic flaws with the human rights tribunals:

The problem is, unlike the courts where the loser pays legal costs to the other side, human rights tribunals have no mandate to award legal costs. This serves employees’ interests but not those of their current or former employers. If employees have no risk of losing at trial and paying legal costs, why not pull the trigger on an extensive complaint?…

What’s worse is that while Sutton was provided with legal counsel at the government’s expense by the Human Rights Legal Support Centre, a provincially funded agency that pursues claims on behalf of employees, her former employer was left to fend for itself.

Second: Here’s a bright Human Rightsish idea: we should start having state employees interrogate 11-year-olds about their sexual orientation so that authorities can “curb future discrimination”. Sounds perfectly non-invasive, doesn’t it? (it’s a complete coincidence that Ignatieff’s smiling mug appeared in the ad right beside the article)

Third: Though it matters little what party they run for, it will be interesting to see how many current or former HRC/T staff are running for federal office. Oh, here’s an older one.