PETITION NOTICE: VACFSS Pursue Court Review of BC Human…

PETITION NOTICE: VACFSS Pursue Court Review of BC Human…

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam), Sḵwx̱wú7mesh (Squamish) and səlilwətaɬ (Tsleil Waututh) / VANCOUVER, BC, Jan. 24, 2023 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Vancouver Aboriginal Child and Family Services Society (VACFSS) has filed a petition with the Supreme Court of British Columbia is appealing a recent decision by the BC Human Rights Tribunal (BC HRT) RR against VACFSSissued November 22, 2022.

“It is important to seek judicial review as the BC HRT exceeded its jurisdiction with this decision,” said Linda Stiller, Chair of the VACFSS Board. “VACFSS regrets having to appeal this case, particularly as an Indigenous-led agency dedicated to restorative practice and the evolution of regulations in the First Nations, Inuit and Métis Children, Youth and Families Protection Act“.

“We understand that this step is very difficult, but it is necessary to ensure that tribal children are protected as intended by the legislation, and our decision in no way reflects the person who made the HRT complaint,” said Stiller. “While we recognize the pain expressed by the complainant during the hearing, it is our duty to ensure that children’s rights are also protected.”

The legal grounds for VACFSS’ request for judicial review include the following:

  1. The member made decisions on child protection matters in accordance with the Children, Family and Community Services Act (CFSCA) which fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the British Columbia Provincial Court and are therefore outside the jurisdiction of the HRT.
  2. The member failed to give effect to the court orders, including consent orders, between the parties and in so doing the HRT undermined a final order of the BC Provincial Court under the CFCincluding custody and contact issues.
  3. The HRT decision is based on the member’s criticism and assessment of perceived deficiencies in the CFC Legislation as a whole, but the HRT has no power to challenge existing legislation. The complaint in question was not a Charter…

[ad_2]

Source story

More to explorer