Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario

**Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario** (Faransa: Tribunal des droits de la personne de l'Ontario) kotun gudanarwa ce a Ontario, Kanada wacce ke sauraron da kuma tantance aikace-aikacen da aka kawo a karkashin Dokar Kare Hakkin dan Adam ta Ontario, dokar lardin da ke tsara haƙƙin ɗan adam a Ontario da ke hana nuna bambanci bisa ga dalilai da yawa (kamar kabilanci, jima'i ko nakasa) a wasu yankuna na zamantakewa (kamar ayyuka, gidaje ko aiki). Yana ɗaya daga cikin kotuna 13 da Ma'aikatar Babban Lauyan ke kula da su waɗanda suka zama Kotuna Ontario. Duk mutumin da ya yi imanin cewa an nuna musu wariya a karkashin Dokar ''Yancin ɗan adam na iya kawo aikace-aikace ga Kotun.

## Tarihi
Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ita ce doka ta farko a Kanada. Ya fara aiki a ranar 15 ga Yuni, 1962, tare da hada dokoki daban-daban da ke hulɗa da nau'ikan nuna bambanci, da ƙara wasu sabbin kariya.

Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ta 1962 ta maye gurbin dokokin adawa da nuna bambanci na lardin, gami da:

* Dokar Ayyukan Amfani, 1951 wanda ya haramta nuna bambanci bisa kabilanci da addini a cikin aiki;
* Dokar Ma'aikacin Mata ta Kyau, 1951 wanda ya hana ma'aikaci biyan ma'aikacin mata kuɗi kaɗan don aikin da namiji ya yi a cikin wannan ma'aikata
* Dokar Kula da Gidaje ta Gaskiya, 1954 wanda ya haramta nuna bambanci a wuraren jama'a kan launin fata, addini ko kabilanci;
* Dokar Hukumar Rashin Nuna Bambanci ta Ontario, 1958 wacce ta kirkiro kwamiti don gudanar da ayyukan da ke sama da haɓaka shirye-shiryen ilimi;

An kirkiro Hukumar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario don gudanar da Dokar Kare Hakkin dan Adam ta Ontario .

## Tsarin yanzu

### Hukumar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ("OHRC")
Tun daga ranar 30 ga Yuni, 2008 duk sabbin korafe-korafe na nuna bambanci ana gabatar da su a Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario. Koyaya, OHRC tana da haƙƙin a sanar da ita game da duk aikace-aikacen kafin HRTO kuma tana karɓar kwafin duk aikace-shirye da martani.

A cikin batutuwan da suka shafi sha'awar jama'a, OHRC na iya ɗaukar shari'arta zuwa Kotun ko shiga tsakani a cikin shari'o'in haƙƙin ɗan adam a gaban Kotun. OHRC kuma tana haɓaka manufofi kuma tana ba da ilimin jama'a, tana sa ido kan haƙƙin ɗan adam, tana yin bincike da bincike, kuma tana gudanar da binciken haƙƙin ɗan ƙasa.

### Cibiyar Taimako ta Shari'a ta 'Yancin Dan Adam
Cibiyar tana ba da sabis na shari'a na haƙƙin ɗan adam ga mutanen da ke gabatar da aikace-aikace tare da Kotun. Ayyuka na iya haɗawa da taimakon shari'a a cikin shigar da aikace-aikace, bayar da shawara, da wakilcin shari'a yayin sulhu da sauraro.

Cibiyar ba ta ba da sabis na shari'a ga masu amsawa kuma kawai tana wakiltar 12% na masu nema a gaban Kotun. Ana ba da fifiko ga ayyuka, musamman cikakken wakilci, ga abokan ciniki waɗanda ke da talauci sosai kuma waɗanda za su sami wahalar kewaya tsarin haƙƙin ɗan adam ba tare da taimako ba. Masu neman takardun da ba su da daraja ko waɗanda za su iya samun wakilcin shari'a ba a wakilta su ba.

### Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ("HRTO")
Wannan kotun gudanarwa ta tantance ko an keta haƙƙin mai nema ko a'a. Kotun tana da niyyar samar da saurin kai tsaye ga masu neman takara da kuma tsarin warware rikice-rikice na gaskiya ga dukkan bangarorin, gami da masu amsawa.

Kotun na iya magance yawan korafe-korafe ba tare da tarawa ba, ana aiwatar da aikace-aikacen da sauri, akwai babban matakin nuna gaskiya ga yanke shawara na kotun. Ana samun gaskiya ta hanyar wadatar jama'a game da yanke shawara na tsari da kuma rubuce-rubuce. Akwai yanke shawara na ƙarshe da yawa da aka yanke akan cancantar su; hukunce-hukuncen kotun game da nuna bambanci sun bayyana ba tare da nuna bambancin ra'ayi ba; kuma ana ba da magunguna na jama'a akai-akai inda ake samun nuna bambanci.

Masu sukar kotun sun hada da: 

* Rashin jituwa a cikin siffofi
* Rashin isasshen amfani da matsakaici
* Kyaututtuka masu lalacewa
* Hanyoyi masu rikitarwa da matakai

## Tsarin
Mutumin da ya fuskanci nuna bambanci na iya shigar da kara tare da Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario. Masu neman shiga HRTO na iya cancanci samun taimakon shari'a daga Cibiyar Taimako ta Shari'a ta 'Yancin Dan Adam. Jam'iyyun na iya zaɓar ƙoƙarin farko don warware batun ta hanyar sulhu. Idan sulhu bai yi nasara ba ko kuma idan bangarorin sun zaɓi kada su yi ƙoƙari su sulhu to ana iya ba da umarnin sauraron farko idan, alal misali, akwai tambaya game da ko HRTO tana da ikon yanke hukunci game da zarge-zargen. Za a iya ba da umarnin sauraron taƙaitaccen idan babu wata dama da za ta iya yin nasara.

Jihohin da aka yi a gaban HRTO shari'a ne. A cikin kwanaki 21 bayan karɓar sanarwa na sauraro, dole ne bangarorin su ba da kansu da bayyanawa, tare da duk wani takarda da ya dace da aikace-aikacen tare da ɗayan. Ba daga baya kwanaki 45 kafin ranar sauraron ba, dole ne jam'iyyun:

# Ka aika wa ɗayan jerin shaidu, sanarwa game da shaidar da aka nufa ta kowane shaida, da kuma jerin takardun da za a gabatar a sauraron. Idan an riga an ba da takardu ga ɗayan, ba lallai ba ne a sake aika su.
# Ka aika HRTO jerin shaidu, maganganun shaidu, da kwafin duk takardun da za a yi amfani da su a sauraron.

Kafin sauraron karar, mai yanke hukunci zai ba bangarorin zaɓi na gwada sulhu / yanke hukunci. Idan sun yarda, mai yanke hukunci zai yi aiki tare da su don ƙoƙarin warware rikicin ta hanyar sulhu. Idan bai yi nasara ba, sauraron zai ci gaba tare da mai yanke hukunci ɗaya, wanda ba zai yi la'akari da wani abu da aka ji ko ya ce a cikin matsakanci ba. Mai yanke hukunci zai ji shaidar bangarorin biyu kafin ya yanke shawara.

Kodayake Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ta ce yanke shawara ta HRTO ta ƙarshe ce kuma tana da ɗaurewa ga bangarorin, HRTO na iya yarda ta sake la'akari da yanke shawara ta ƙarshe idan:

* jam'iyya tana da sabbin hujjoji waɗanda ba su samuwa a lokacin sauraron ba wanda zai iya canza sakamakon shawarar HRTO
* jam'iyya ba ta sami sanarwa game da sauraron ba kuma ba ta iya shiga ba, ba tare da kuskuren jam'iyyar ba
* yanke shawara ya sabawa tsarin HRTO ko shari'ar shari'a kuma ya haɗa da al'amarin da ke da muhimmanci ga jama'a ko jama'a

Babu wani hakki a matsayin al'amari na doka don daukaka kara kan shawarar HRTO. Koyaya, a ƙarƙashin iyakantaccen yanayi, jam'iyyar da ba ta gamsu ba na iya yin buƙata don sake dubawa na shari'a ga Kotun Koli ta Ontario. Za a ba da bita na shari'a ne kawai idan kotun ta gamsu da cewa shawarar ba ta da ma'ana. Wannan ba yana nufin cewa kotun kawai tana tunanin cewa HRTO na iya ko ya kamata ya yanke shawara daban.

## Matsayi da nauyin hujja
A cikin shari'o'i a gaban Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario, mafi girman ma'auni na hujja shine ma'aunin farar hula, wanda ke kan ma'aani na yiwuwar ko "mafi yiwuwa fiye da ba haka ba". Wannan idan aka kwatanta da ma'auni na hujja wanda ya shafi shari'o'in aikata laifuka, wanda shine laifi fiye da shakka mai ma'ana. Nauyin hujja ya dogara ne akan jam'iyyar da ke yin zargi.

Kamar yadda yake a cikin shari'o'in aikata laifuka, yana yiwuwa a sami wani abu a kan muhimmiyar ko cikakkiyar shaida. A lokuta masu sauki, ka'idojin da aka kafa da kyau suna aiki a cikin mahallin haƙƙin ɗan adam:

# Da zarar an kafa shari'ar nuna bambanci, nauyin ya sauya ga mai amsa don samar da bayani mai ma'ana wanda ba nuna bambanci ba ne.
# Ba ya isa ya karyata ra'ayi na nuna bambanci cewa mai amsawa yana iya ba da shawarar kawai wani bayani mai ma'ana; mai amsawa dole ne ya ba da bayani wanda ya dace da duk shaidun.
# Ba a buƙatar mai shigar da kara don tabbatar da cewa ayyukan mai amsawa ba su haifar da wani ƙarshe ba amma cewa nuna bambanci shine tushen yanke shawara a cikin batun a cikin shari'ar da aka ba shi.
# Babu wani abin da ake buƙata cewa, halin masu amsawa, don samun nuna bambanci, dole ne ya dace da zargin nuna bambanci kuma ya saba da kowane bayani mai ma'ana.
# Babban batun shi ne ko ƙaddamar da nuna bambanci ya fi dacewa daga shaidar fiye da ainihin bayanin da mai amsa ya bayar.

## Shahararrun hukunce-hukuncen da shari'ar shari'a
Saboda sake fasalin a cikin 2008, duk aikace-aikacen da aka yi bayan Yuni 30, 2008 an shigar da su tare da Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario; kafin wannan ranar, Hukumar Kare Hakkin dan Adam ta Ontario ta shigar da aikace-aikace kuma ta ji su.

### Ayyukan jama'a, kayayyaki, wurare
Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ta ba da cewa "[kowane] mutum yana da haƙƙin daidaitawa dangane da ayyuka, kayayyaki da wurare, ba tare da nuna bambanci ba saboda launin fata, kakanni, wurin asali, launi, asalin kabilanci, zama ɗan ƙasa, imani, jima'i, asalin jinsi, nuna jinsi, shekaru, matsayin aure, matsayin iyali ko nakasa. "  Kalmomin "hidima", "mai kyau", da "sauci" ba a bayyana su a cikin Dokar ba.[e] A cikin *Gay Alliance Toward Equality v Vancouver Sun* kotun ta ambaci ayyuka a matsayin "abubuwa kamar gidajen cin abinci, mashaya, gidajen cin gashin kansu, tashoshin sabis, sufuri na jama'a da kayan aikin jama'a". Fiye da haka, a Ontario, ƙaddamar da wani abu da ya zama "hidima", "mai kyau", ko "haɗin kai" sun haɗa da: zama memba a cikin ƙungiyoyin wasanni masu son, bincike na 'yan sanda na waɗanda aka tsare,    shigarwa zuwa kwalejin sakandare mai zaman kansa,  da kuma shigarwa zuwa gidan wasan kwaikwayo.

#### Bayanan launin fata da nuna bambanci
**Nassiah v Peel (Muniyar Yankin) Hukumar Kula da Ayyuka (2007) **

Ms. Nassiah ta shigar da aikace-aikace a karkashin Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario tana zargin cewa an nuna mata wariya game da ayyukan saboda tseren ta game da binciken 'yan sanda game da zargin satar kaya.

An gano jami'in binciken ya nuna bambanci ga Ms. Nassiah lokacin da ya tambayi idan tana magana da Turanci bisa ga launin fatar ta, ta yi amfani da kalma mai banƙyama da lalata don komawa gare ta kuma ta yi barazanar kai ta kurkuku, kuma ta shiga cikin bincike mai tsawo da tsawo inda Ms. Nussiah ta bi da mafi girman ƙiyayya da bincike saboda baƙar fata ce, wanda ya zama fasalin launin fata. Hukumar ta rubuta cewa:

"Rashin bambancin launin fata wani nau'i ne na nuna bambanci na launin fata. Babu wani sabon abu a gano cewa bambancin launin fatar ya saba wa Dokar 'Yancin Dan Adam... Yana kuma koyaushe ya saba wa Code for the 'yan sanda su bi da mutane daban-daban a kowane bangare na tsarin' yan sanda, saboda tseren su, ko da tseren su shine kawai abu daya a cikin bambancin bambancin bambanci. Abin da ke faruwa (a cikin shekaru ashirin da suka gabata) shine karuwar shaidar cewa wannan nau' yan sanda ba su ba su ba ne sakamakon nuna bambancin launin launin fata a cikin tsarin da yawa na nuna bambancin da yawa na 'yan sanda ke faruwa a cikin' yan sanda suna karɓar' yan sanda don karɓar' ya zama wani ɓangare na' yan sanda a cikin tsarin' yanci a cikin' ya zama' yan sanda.

Hukumar ta ambaci adadi mai yawa na shari'a da karatun ilimi, da kuma shaidar ƙwararru, a kan batun ƙididdigar launin fata wanda aka kammala cewa ƙididdigan launin fata ya wanzu kuma yana faruwa a Kanada. Kuma an gano cewa akwai tsarin shaidar da ke tallafawa matakin bincike mafi girma da rarrabe launin fata a wannan yanayin. Baya ga magungunan tsarin da aka ba da umarni don magance batutuwan horar da 'yan sanda, an ba Ms. Nassiah kyautar $ 20,000 don lalacewar gaba ɗaya da baƙin ciki na hankali.

**Phipps v Toronto Police Services Board (2009) **

Mista Phipps ya gabatar da aikace-aikace a karkashin Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario yana zargin cewa an nuna masa wariya game da ayyukan saboda tserensa game da abin da ya faru da 'yan sanda a shekara ta 2005. Mista Phipps ya yi aiki da Kanada Post kuma yana isar da wasiku a cikin unguwa mai arziki. Yana sanye da jakarsa, yana ɗauke da jakarsa ta wasiƙa, kuma yana isar da wasiku da takardu na yau da kullun. 'Yan sanda sun dakatar da shi kuma an bincika asalinsa, sannan' yan sanda suka ci gaba da bin sa kuma bincika asalinsa tare da mai gida da mai ɗaukar farar wasika. 'Yan sanda ba su bincika asalin ba ko kuma sun sami wani daga cikin sauran mutanen da ba a saba da su ba a yankin, dukansu fari ne. Yin amfani da *Nassiah da Peel* da sauran shari'o'i, kotun ta gano cewa wannan lamari ne na nuna bambanci, musamman fasalin launin fata.

**Sharon Abbott v Toronto Police Services Board (2009) **

A watan Yunin 2007, Sharon Abbott, mai ɗaukar jarida, ta shigar da aikace-aikace a ƙarƙashin Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario tana zargin cewa an nuna mata wariya game da ayyuka saboda tserenta da jima'i da ya saba wa Dokar, game da abin da ya faru da 'yan sanda wanda ya haifar da kama ta. Babu wani zarge-zargen da aka kama ta da ya haifar da hukunci lokacin da ta je gaban Mai Shari'a na Zaman Lafiya.

Kotun ta lura cewa "kamar yadda a lokuta da yawa da ke zargin nuna bambancin launin fata, babu wata shaida kai tsaye cewa tseren ko launi na mai shigar da kara ya kasance wani abu a cikin lamarin da ke cikin batun. A sakamakon haka, batun ko ayyukan masu amsawa sun zama nuna bambancin jinsi a keta Dokar ya kamata a tantance su daidai da ka'idodin da aka kafa da suka dace da shari'o'in shaidar yanayi. "

Kotun ta gano cewa tseren mai nema da / ko jinsi sun taka rawar gani a cikin gazawar jami'in ya dauki matakai don gwadawa da rage yanayin. Sun fahimci cewa akwai wani nau'i na iko da rashin daidaituwa a cikin hulɗa tsakanin jami'in 'yan sanda da jama'a, kuma wannan na iya zama mai tsanani ba daidai ba lokacin da aka haɗa shi da ƙarfin launin fata da / ko ƙarfin jinsi. Kotun ta ambaci hukuncin da Kotun Koli ta Kanada ta yanke, wanda ya fahimci cewa nuna bambancin launin fata galibi ba ya aiki da hankali, amma ya fito ne daga halayen da ba a sani ba da kuma tsarin imani. A cikin tarihin tarihi, wasu daga cikin waɗannan halayen da tsarin imani sun haɗa da gaskiyar cewa ana sa ran baƙar fata (da sauran kungiyoyi) su "san matsayinsu" kuma duk wani baƙar fata wanda ke magana ko ya ƙi yin biyayya za a ɗauke shi a matsayin "mai yawa" kuma yana buƙatar a bi da shi da tsanani.

Musamman, an gano cewa jami'in bai kasance mai ma'ana ba a cikin hulɗarsa da Ms. Abbott kuma cewa ayyukansa sun dace da bayyanar wariyar launin fata inda "mutumin fari a matsayin iko yana da tsammanin biyayya da biyayya daga mutumin launin fata, kuma yana haifar da mummunan sakamako idan ba a ba da wannan biyayya da biyayya ba" kuma wannan kai tsaye ya haifar da kamawa da wuce gona da iri na Ms. Abbot.

Kotun ta ba Ms. Abbott $ 5,000 a cikin lalacewa a matsayin diyya ga raunin da ta samu ga mutuntakarta da mutuncin kanta kuma ta ki bayar da duk wani lalacewar da ta samu a lokacin da aka kama ta yayin da suka fahimci rawar da ta taka wajen kara lamarin a wannan bangaren.

Mai magana da yawun 'yan sanda na Toronto Mark Pugash ya yi jayayya cewa hukuncin kotun ya kawar da duk wani kariya mai yiwuwa game da zargin wariyar launin fata, yana mai cewa "wannan ya kamata ya tsoratar da duk wanda zai iya karɓar irin wannan zargi saboda ba ya kama da za ku iya kare kanka," yana nuna cewa kotun ta bayyana cewa "babu wata shaida kai tsaye cewa tseren ko launi na mai shigar da kara ya kasance wani abu a cikin lamarin".

### Gidaje
Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ta ba da cewa "[kowane] mutum yana da haƙƙin daidaitawa dangane da zama na masauki, ba tare da nuna bambanci ba saboda launin fata, kakanni, wurin asali, launi, asalin kabilanci, zama ɗan ƙasa, imani, jima'i, jima'in jinsi, nuna jinsi, shekaru, matsayin aure, matsayin iyali, nakasa ko karɓar taimakon jama'a. " Wannan haƙƙin ya shafi yara masu 'yanci.[e] Mutum kuma yana da 'yanci a ƙarƙashin Dokar ya kasance' yanci daga cin zarafin mai gida, wakilin mai gida, ko kuma mai zama a wannan ginin a kowane ɗayan dalilan da ke sama.

Ana nuna nuna nuna nuna bambanci a lokuta inda akwai:

* Ƙin yarda da masauki bisa ga dalilan da aka haramta
* Ƙin yarda da masauki na iya haifar da ƙin masauki ga mutumin da ke da ma'aurata masu ganewa tare da tabbatar da cewa masauki har yanzu yana nan
* Ƙin yarda da masauki na iya haifar da rashin cire shingen ga samun damar shiga wurin ga nakasassu 
* Biyanci na mai sayarwa wanda ya dogara da halayyar mutum 
* Tsayar da dokoki daban-daban a kan mutum tare da halayyar mutum, idan aka kwatanta da sauran masu haya 
* Amincewa da ka'idojin zabar masu haya na nuna bambanci bisa ga dalilan da aka haramta 
* Ƙuntatawar amfani da wuraren da aka haramta
* In ba haka ba cin zarafin mai haya a kan haramtacciyar hujja

### Aiki
Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ta ba da cewa "[kowane] mutum yana da haƙƙin daidaitawa dangane da aiki ba tare da nuna bambanci ba saboda launin fata, kakanni, asalin asali, launin fata, ɗan ƙasa, imani, jima'i, yanayin jima'i), asalin jinsi, nuna jinsi, shekaru, rikodin laifuka, matsayin aure, matsayin iyali ko nakasa. "[e]

Rashin amincewar ma'aikaci don daukar ma'aikacin da ya cancanta a kan dalilan da aka haramta yana nuna bambanci game da aiki. Har ila yau, yana da nuna bambanci game da aiki don ƙin ci gaba da aiki na yanzu (ma'ana korar, saukewa, ritaya, ƙin duk wani fa'ida ko ci gaba, da dai sauransu) bisa ga dalilan da aka haramta. Koyaya, duk wani bambancin magani wanda ya danganci tushen da aka haramta na iya zama nuna bambanci, gami da ka'idojin tufafi da bukatun bayyanar.

#### BFOR/Q karewa
BFOR mai aminci na sana'a (BFOR) ko ƙwarewar sana'a mai aminci (BFOQ) (abbreviated BFOR / Q) inganci ne ko halayyar da aka ba ma'aikata damar la'akari da shi yayin yanke shawara game da hayar ko riƙe ma'aikata. Idan ya zama dole a tada BFOR / Q a matsayin kariya, ingancin da ake tambaya shine wanda in ba haka ba zai zama nuna bambanci ba bisa ka'ida ba a wasu batutuwa. Don samun nasara a cikin kariya ta BFOR / Q, dole ne ma'aikaci ya gamsu da gwajin *Meiorin / Grismer*. Wannan yana buƙatar su iya tabbatarwa (bayan ma'aikacin ya gabatar da wani lamari na nuna bambanci):

# Ma'aikaci ya karɓi ma'auni don manufa / burin da ke da alaƙa da aikin da ya shafi; (gwajin da ya dace) 
# Ma'aikaci ya karɓi ma'auni da gaskiya da bangaskiya mai kyau cewa ya zama dole don cika wannan manufa mai alaƙa da aiki; da
# Ma'auni ya zama dole don cimma burinsa ko burinsa, a ma'anar cewa wanda ake tuhuma ba zai iya karɓar mutanen da ke da halaye na mai nema ba tare da fuskantar wahala ba.

An tsara wannan gwajin a cikin tanadi da yawa na Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario . Koyaya, ba za a iya tayar da shi a matsayin kariya ga cin zarafi ba saboda babu wata hujja ta halal don cin zarafi a ƙarƙashin dokar haƙƙin ɗan adam.

### Ramuwar gayya
Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ta ba da cewa "[kowane] mutum yana da damar da'awar da aiwatar da hakkokinsa a karkashin wannan Dokar, don kafawa da shiga cikin shari'o'i a karkashin wannan dokar da kuma ƙin keta haƙƙin wani mutum a ƙarƙashin wannan Dokar, ba tare da ramuwar gayya ko barazanar ramuwar martani don yin hakan ba. "  Yana nuna bambanci ga duk wanda ya amsa (ciki har da ma'aikaci) don ramawa ga mai nema don neman haƙƙin ɗan adam.[e] Za a iya amincewa da korafin ramuwar gayya, koda kuwa an watsar da korafin asali.

**Morgan v Herman Miller Canada Inc (2013) **

Mista Morgan ya gabatar da aikace-aikace a karkashin Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario yana zargin cewa an nuna masa wariya game da aiki saboda tserensa da kuma ramuwar gayya don yin korafin kare hakkin dan adam.

Mai nema ya gabatar da korafi game da batutuwan kare hakkin dan adam tare da memba na gudanarwar kamfaninsa. Musamman, ya ji cewa ana wulakanta shi bisa ga tserensa, ta hanyar buƙatarsa don yin ayyuka masu ƙasƙanci. Ba a taba bincika waɗannan korafe-korafe ba, ba a taɓa biye da su ba, kuma an dakatar da aikinsa wata ɗaya bayan ya yi korafin, ana zargin saboda dalilin.

Kamfanin ya yi iƙirarin cewa an kore shi saboda yada bayanan karya. Koyaya, a kowane lokaci babu wanda ya taɓa magana da mai nema don ba shi damar magance zarge-zargen ko kuma ya umurce shi da ya daina, ana zargin, yada bayanan da ba daidai ba. Kotun ta gano cewa babu wata shaida da za ta goyi bayan cewa an dakatar da mai nema saboda wannan dalili kuma masu amsa sun yanke shawarar dakatar da shi maimakon magance korafin kare hakkin dan adam.

Saboda haka, kodayake Mista Morgan ba shi da da'awar nuna bambanci, saboda babu wata shaida da za ta goyi bayan cewa kamfanin yana bi da shi a hanyar nuna bambanci. Kotun ta gano cewa yana da da'arin ramuwar gayya yayin da aka dakatar da shi don mayar da martani ga yin korafin kare hakkin dan adam, wanda aka tilasta wa ma'aikatarsa ya bincika. Kotun ta ba da umarnin cewa Herman Miller Canada ta biya $ 56,000 a matsayin diyya don asarar albashi (a biya watanni 14) da kuma $ 15,000 don raunin mutunci da mutunci.

### 'Yanci na faɗar albarkacin baki
**An shigar da korafi game da mujallar ''Maclean's'' (2008) **

A watan Disamba na shekara ta 2007 ne Mohamed Elmasry na Majalisar Musulunci ta Kanada ya gabatar da korafin kare hakkin dan adam game da mujallar *Maclean's* tare da Hukumar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario. An zargi mujallar Maclean da buga labarai goma sha takwas na Islamophobic tsakanin Janairu 2005 da Yuli 2007. Labaran da ake tambaya sun haɗa da wani shafi na Mark Steyn mai taken "The Future Belongs to Islam".   A watan Afrilu na shekara ta 2008, OHRC ta yanke hukuncin cewa ba ta da ikon jin korafin bisa ga gaskiyar cewa da'awar tana zargin cewa abinda ke cikin mujallar, ba ƙin mujallar don samar da sarari don karyata ba, ya keta hakkinsu, kuma Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario ba Hukumar ikon magance abubuwan da ke cikin muhalli. Koyaya, sanarwa da hukumar ta fitar ta haifar da damuwa game da labarin da buƙatar tattaunawa da kuma cikakkiyar hanyar da za a iya magance batun 'yancin faɗar albarkacin baki a cikin mahallin haƙƙin ɗan adam.

A cikin wata hira da ta biyo baya tare da National Post, Babban Kwamishinan Barbara Hall ya bayyana cewa "Lokacin da kafofin watsa labarai suka rubuta, ya kamata ya yi taka tsantsan cewa ba ya inganta ra'ayoyin da za su yi mummunar tasiri ga kungiyoyi masu ganewa. Ina tsammanin mutum yana buƙatar yin taka tsantsi sosai lokacin da mutum yake magana a cikin gaba ɗaya, cewa a zahiri mutum yana magana ne game da gaskiya game da dukkan mutane a cikin wata kungiya ta [yacece-karyacewar kwamishinan da ita ga abin da aka yi la' yan jarida ba ta ba ta ba za su ba ta ba, ba za su sake yin amfani da ita ba.Maclean's casequot;},quot;datequot;:{quot;wtquot;:quot;April 9, 2008quot;},quot;publisherquot;:{quot;wtquot;:quot;National Postquot;},quot;authorquot;:{quot;wtquot;:quot;Joseph Breanquot;}},quot;iquot;:0}}]}\" data-ve-no-generated-contents=\"true\" id=\"mwAtc\">nbsp;*Maclean's* case\". National Post."}}" id="cite_ref-NP2_45-0" rel="dc:references" typeof="mw:Extension/ref">[./Human_Rights_Tribunal_of_Ontario#cite_note-NP2-45 [1]

Mark Steyn, wanda ya rubuta labarin a cikin *Maclean's* cewa korafin ya dogara ne akansa, ya kuma soki Hall da OHRC, yana mai cewa "Ko da yake su (OHRC) ba su da ƙarfin jin karar, suna iya samun mu da laifi".

### Amfani da tsari da farashi
**Lisa MacDonald v Downtown Health Club for Women (2009) **

Lisa MacDonald ta shigar da aikace-aikace a karkashin Dokar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario tana zargin cewa an nuna mata wariya game da ayyuka bisa ga jima'i game da buƙatar shigarwa zuwa wurin motsa jiki na mata kawai a shekara ta 2006. 

A shekara ta 2006, Ms. MacDonald ta ziyarci Cibiyar Kiwon Lafiya ta Downtown don Mata a St. Catharines, Ontario, kuma ta nemi zama memba. Mai mallakar wurin, John Fulton ya yi iƙirarin cewa ya damu da cewa ta kasance mai canza jima'i kafin tiyata. Fulton ya yi jayayya cewa Dokar ta ba da damar masu ba da sabis su ƙuntata damar shiga wurare "ga mutane iri ɗaya na jinsi a kan halin kirki na jama'a. " Kuma a ra'ayinsa, nuna jikin namiji, har ma a kan wanda ya nuna kansa a matsayin mace, wasu mata na iya fassara shi a matsayin mara kyau a dakin motsa jiki. Fulton ya yi iƙirarin cewa bai taɓa musanta Ms. Robinson ba kuma an maraba da ita don amfani da kulob din da zarar an kammala aikin. Koyaya, a cewar Hukumar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario, Dokar ta haramta nuna bambanci bisa ga jima'i, gami da asalin jinsi, kuma babu bambanci tsakanin masu canza jima'i waɗanda ke cikin matakai daban-daban na sauyawa.

Kotunan gudanarwa, a matsayin halittu na doka, ba su da ikon bayar da farashi sai dai idan an ba su wannan iko ta hanyar doka. Mai yanke hukunci ya gano cewa a karkashin s.17.1 na *Dokar Tsarin Mulki*,  Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Ontario tana da ikon bayar da farashi a wasu yanayi. Abubuwan da kotun ke buƙata don yin amfani da ikon ba da kuɗin ba a cika su ba a wannan shari'ar sabili da haka mai yanke hukunci ba shi da ikon ba shi da kuɗin kuɗi.

Mai shigar da kara ya bukaci mai yanke hukunci ya yi amfani da hankalinsa kuma ya ba da kyautar kuɗi a kan mai nema, yayin da ya yi zargin cewa janye aikace-aikacen ya zama cin zarafin tsarin kotun. Mai yanke hukunci ya gano cewa wannan wata hanya ce kawai don tsara buƙatar farashi kuma cewa, ba tare da la'akari ba, mai nema bai yi amfani da tsari ba. Bisa ga shaidar mai amsawa, mai amsawa ya jinkirta karɓar aikace-aikacen Ms. MacDonald don zama memba na dakin motsa jiki kuma a ganinsa zai kasance daidai da ƙin yarda da shi gaba ɗaya. Aikace-aikacen don haka ya tayar da muhimman tambayoyi game da girman Dokar da aikace-aikacen ta ga mutanen da suka canza jinsi. Bugu da ƙari, an gano cewa masu amsawa na iya haifar da farashin shari'a mara amfani ta hanyar tayar da batutuwan farko na ƙarya, gami da muhawara ta tsarin mulki wanda daga baya suka watsar da shi da kuma samar da cikakken tarihin likitancin mai nema, wasu daga cikinsu ba su da mahimmanci ga batutuwan da ke cikin aikace-aikacen.

## Manazarta

## Haɗin waje

* 
* Dokar 'Yancin Dan Adam ta Ontario
* Dokokin Tsarin, Dokokin Ayyuka, da Siyasa