MEDIA ADVISORY: Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission Affirms Separation of Religion and Government

MEDIA ADVISORY:  Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission Affirms Separation of Religion and Government

SASKATOON, SK, Apr. 14, 2016 – Although the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission (SHRC) has dismissed Ashu M. G. Solo’s prayer recitation case against Councillor Randy Donauer and the City of Saskatoon, they affirmed the separation of religion and government.  Donauer tried to lead a diverse audience in a Christian prayer on April 18, 2012 at a Volunteer Appreciation Banquet organized by the Mayor's Office. 

SHRC found that a one-time prayer recitation did not cause sufficient harm to breach the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, but that ongoing prayer recitations would.  Judge David Arnot, chief commissioner of SHRC, wrote, “The adoption of a general practice of reciting prayers at municipal events is contrary to the Code.”  His full decision is available at

http://saskatchewanhumanrights.ca/pub/2016/20160414_SK-12_043_Dismissal.pdf

“Regardless of Judge Arnot’s decision on my civil rights case, I’m glad that filing this case caused the city to stop prayer recitations at civic events,” Solo said.  “Other municipalities should heed the chief commissioner saying that a general practice of prayer recitations is contrary to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code.  Donauer said that he was just expressing his beliefs.  He was abusing his government office to get other people to pray according to his beliefs.”

Justin Trottier, board member of the Canadian Secular Alliance, said, “The Canadian Secular Alliance is thankful that the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission recognized it’s inappropriate to have prayer recitations at city events and that the city has discontinued this discriminatory practice.”

For further information:

Ashu M. G. Solo

amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us

Canadian Secular Alliance

Justin Trottier

justin.trottier@gmail.com

Supreme Court of Canada decision on Saguenay City Council prayer recitation case will affect whether prayer recitations are allowed at government meetings across Canada including in Saskatchewan

The Supreme Court of Canada will be hearing a case on whether Saguenay City Council meetings can be opened with prayer recitations.  The case was filed by Alain Simoneau.  The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal ruled in favor of Simoneau.  The Quebec Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Saguenay Mayor Jean Tremblay.  Now the case is being appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada by Alain Simoneau and the Quebec Secular Movement.

See the following articles:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/supreme-court-to-hear-the-saguenay-city-hall-prayer-case-1.2498935

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/supreme-court-to-hear-case-of-municipal-council-opening-meetings-with-prayer/article16364426/

The outcome of Simoneau's case will affect whether prayer recitations are allowed at government meetings across Canada including in Saskatchewan and Saskatoon.  I was hoping my prayer recitation case would have that kind of impact, but Simoneau's case was filed first in 2006 and will set the legal precedent for Canada.

The Canadian Secular Alliance has been granted intervener status in Simoneau's case.  They could use your support:

http://secularalliance.ca/media/special-projects/csa-prayer-case-fundraiser/

There won't be any further developments in my cases until 2015.  The Christmas message case was dismissed by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.

MEDIA ALERT: Sask. Human Rights Commission Dismisses City of Saskatoon’s Application for Summary Dismissal of Ashu Solo v. City of Saskatoon and Randy Donauer

From: Ashu M. G. Solo
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 11:16 PM
Subject: MEDIA ALERT: Sask. Human Rights Commission Dismisses City of Saskatoon’s Application for Summary Dismissal of Ashu Solo v. City of Saskatoon and Randy Donauer

Dear Media,

I am attaching a scan of a letter and envelope from the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission (SHRC).  They have dismissed the City of Saskatoon’s frivolous and vexatious application for summary dismissal of my prayer recitation case against the City of Saskatoon (Mayor's Office) and Councillor Randy Donauer.  They have also dismissed a request by me for the chief commissioner, Judge David Arnot, to recuse himself from dealing further with this case because he has publicly praised Mayor Don Atchison and knows Atchison from high school. 

The City of Saskatoon could appeal the dismissal of their application for summary dismissal at the Court of Queen’s Bench.  If they lose there, they could appeal at the Court of Appeal. 

If they don’t appeal, the case will move forward.  This is the SHRC resolution roadmap: 

http://saskatchewanhumanrights.ca/how-to-file-a-complaint/the-resolution-roadmap

As you can see in the attached letter, the arguments of the City Solicitor's Office in its application for summary dismissal were frivolous and vexatious and the SHRC recognized them as such.

The City Solicitor's Office says that I threaten human rights complaints to advance my political agenda.  There's nothing wrong with someone threatening to file a human rights complaint if an organization doesn't stop a discriminatory action against him.  That's all I've done.

The City Solicitor’s Office says the media was misinformed about not participating in mediation.  SHRC sent me an email message saying the City of Saskatoon wouldn’t participate in mediation.  I forwarded this to the media.  Then the City Solicitor’s Office claimed it would participate in mediation, but wasn’t available on the date set by SHRC.  Since then, I’ve repeatedly called for the City of Saskatoon and Donauer to attempt mediation and they could agree at any time, but haven’t done so.

The City Solicitor's Office claimed that the time deadline wasn't met.  No deadline was missed.  I filed my intake questionnaire with SHRC just 13 days after the volunteer appreciation banquet in which Donauer tried to lead the audience in a prayer.  I waited 13 days because I first gave Atchison and Donauer the chance to agree to stop having prayer recitations at future events.  I had a year to file this intake questionnaire according to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code. 

The City of Saskatoon, Atchison, and Donauer are wasting their time and taxpayer money by not agreeing to cease prayer recitations and now by making frivolous and vexatious arguments to try to get this case dismissed.

Atchison, Donauer, and my opponents are really petty for not agreeing to get rid of prayer recitations at City of Saskatoon events and for forcing me to go to SHRC.  If this case goes to trial, I seek a judgment that has the effect of banning prayer recitations at civic events throughout the province of Saskatchewan and that has significant persuasive value in other provinces too.

I'm fighting for a country where the government neither promotes nor suppresses any religion, where the government neither favors nor disfavors any religion, and where the government equitably treats people of all religions, nonreligious spiritual people, agnostics, and atheists.

Here's a good article on freedom of and from religion in Canada: 

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/doug-thomas/religious-freedom-atheists-canada_b_5351944.html

My three human rights complaints against the City of Saskatoon for retaliation against me by the City of Saskatoon are still pending:

http://www.saskatoonhomepage.ca/city-waiting-to-take-action-on-complaints/itemid_21

I asked for these human rights complaints to be combined into one case.  SHRC has to decide whether there is reasonable grounds to believe the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code may have been violated.  If they find reasonable grounds, then they will move forward with this case too.

If you have any questions, you can reach me at amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us. 

Best regards,

Ashu M. G. Solo

Human Rights Complaints against the City of Saskatoon for Retaliation against Ashu M. G. Solo

Human Rights Complaints against the City of Saskatoon for Retaliation against Ashu M. G. Solo

By Ashu M. G. Solo

This human rights case is comprised of three human rights complaints against the City of Saskatoon for retaliating against me for my prayer recitation human rights complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint.

I filed a prayer recitation case against the City of Saskatoon (Mayor’s Office), Mayor Don Atchison, and Councillor Randy Donauer with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission. The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission decided to proceed against the City of Saskatoon and Donauer with this case. I filed a Christmas message case against the City of Saskatoon (Saskatoon Transit Services) with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission. The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission declined to proceed with this case.

As a result of filing these cases, the massive media coverage that I received for these cases, the negative attention on the City of Saskatoon, the negative attention on Atchison and Donauer, the negative attention on all other members of City Council, and the negative attention on the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee and its members, there was major and widespread retaliation against me by the City of Saskatoon.

Retaliation for filing human rights complaints is considered a form of discrimination and strictly prohibited under Section 45 of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code:

Discrimination for taking part in proceedings under this Act prohibited

45 No person shall:

(a) refuse to employ or to continue to employ any person;

(b) threaten to dismiss or to penalize in any other way any person with respect to that person’s employment or any term, condition or privilege thereof;

(c) discriminate against any person with respect to that person’s employment or any term, condition or privilege thereof; or

(d) intimidate, retaliate against, coerce or impose any pecuniary or other penalty, loss or other penalty, loss or disadvantage upon any person;

on the grounds that that person:

(e) has made or may make a complaint under this Act;

(f) has made or may make a disclosure concerning any matter complained of;

(g) has testified or may testify in a proceeding under this Act; or

(h) has participated or may participate in any other way in a proceeding under this Act.

1979, c.S-24.1, s.45; 2000, c.26, s.35.

This human rights case is composed of three human rights complaints that can be dealt with in one combined case with the City of Saskatoon being the respondent. All three human rights complaints involve retaliation against me by the City of Saskatoon for my human rights complaints.

The first human rights complaint is against the City of Saskatoon (Executive Committee) for retaliating against me by not reappointing me to the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee or another civic committee or board. The second human rights complaint is against the City of Saskatoon (City Solicitor’s Office) for retaliating against me by depriving me of my right to directly petition my elected representatives on City Council on public policy issues and by telling employees of other City of Saskatoon departments to not talk to me. The third human rights complaint is against the City of Saskatoon (Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Office) and City of Saskatoon (Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee of Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee) for retaliating against me by not considering my submissions to a literary contest. The three human rights complaints follow in this document. 

Ashu M. G. Solo

1. Human Rights Complaint #1: Ashu M. G. Solo v. City of Saskatoon (Executive Committee)

When I filed the prayer recitation human rights complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint, I was a representative on the City of Saskatoon’s Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee. I was a representative on this committee from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012. I had a one-year appointment.

Representatives on the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee and other civic committees are easily reappointed unless they have exceeded the maximum number of years allowed on that committee or they do a really bad job on that committee. I was by far the most effective representative on the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee. My membership on the committee while launching my prayer recitation case and Christmas message case brought massive public attention to the committee. Everybody who wanted to be reappointed to the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee was reappointed. Even those committee representatives who were frequently absent, who never said anything at meetings, or who never did anything but attend meetings were reappointed.

For 2013, I applied to be reappointed to the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee or to be appointed to the Police Services Board or Library Board. I was not reappointed to the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee. I was not appointed to the Police Services Board or Library Board. The deadline for applying for civic committees and boards was originally October 31, 2012. In fact, they extended the call for applications for the Library Board until April 9, 2013 instead of appointing me because they didn’t get enough other applications and didn’t want to appoint me. I didn’t know until

May 2013 whether I had been appointed to a civic committee or board for 2013. Appointments are made by the Executive Committee, which is composed of the mayor and all city councillors.

Exhibit 1-1 is a letter from the City of Saskatoon dated May 8, 2013 stating that I was not appointed to a committee for 2013.

For 2014, I applied to be reappointed to the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee or to be appointed to the Environmental Advisory Committee. I was not reappointed to the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee. I was not appointed to the Environmental Advisory Committee. In fact, they extended the call for applications for the Environmental Advisory Committee instead of appointing me because they didn’t get enough other applications and didn’t want to appoint me. I didn’t know until February 2014 whether I had been appointed to a civic committee or board for 2014. Appointments are made by the Executive Committee, which is composed of the mayor and all city councillors.

Exhibit 1-2 is a letter from the City of Saskatoon dated February 12, 2014 stating that I was not appointed to a committee for 2014.

Everyone except me easily gets reappointed year after year to the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee if they want to be and they haven’t served the maximum permissible number of years on the committee. This was clearly retaliation by the Executive Committee for my prayer recitation human rights complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.

Retaliation for filing human rights complaints is considered a form of discrimination and strictly prohibited under Section 45 of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code:

Discrimination for taking part in proceedings under this Act prohibited

45 No person shall:

(a) refuse to employ or to continue to employ any person;

(b) threaten to dismiss or to penalize in any other way any person with respect to that person’s

employment or any term, condition or privilege thereof;

(c) discriminate against any person with respect to that person’s employment or any term,

condition or privilege thereof; or

(d) intimidate, retaliate against, coerce or impose any pecuniary or other penalty, loss or other

penalty, loss or disadvantage upon any person;

on the grounds that that person:

(e) has made or may make a complaint under this Act;

(f) has made or may make a disclosure concerning any matter complained of;

(g) has testified or may testify in a proceeding under this Act; or

(h) has participated or may participate in any other way in a proceeding under this Act.

1979, c.S-24.1, s.45; 2000, c.26, s.35.

Ashu M. G. Solo

Exhibit 1-1. Letter from City of Saskatoon dated May 8, 2013

Exhibit 1-2. Letter from City of Saskatoon dated Feb. 12, 2014

2. Human Rights Complaint #2: Ashu M. G. Solo v. City of Saskatoon (City Solicitor’s Office)

After I filed the Christmas message human rights complaint, the City Solicitor’s Office of the City of Saskatoon said that they were banning me from directly communicating with members of City Council.

This ban is still in effect. They claimed that I would be investigated if I emailed them. Who would I be investigated by? What’s the crime in communicating with members of City Council? I have the right to directly petition my elected representatives on public policy issues. Prior to this ban, I frequently emailed members of City Council about all kinds of issues from secularism to icy roads to snow removal to potholes to policing to government waste. The City Solicitor’s Office falsely claimed that I had only emailed City Council about my human rights complaints. This ban on communicating directly with members of City Council was clearly retaliation for my Christmas message human rights complaint and prayer recitation human rights complaint.

City solicitor Christine Bogad told people in other city departments to not talk to me. I know she told Russ Munro in the City of Saskatoon’s Water and Wastewater Treatment to not talk to me. I made a complaint about a city employee named Jason Lagacy who sent me an abusive message about my human rights complaints from a city computer during working hours. I talked to his manager, Russ Munro, about this. Then when I phoned back to find out what he had done, Russ Munro said that the City Solicitor’s Office had told him not talk to me. This was clearly retaliation for my prayer recitation human rights complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint.

City solicitor Christine Bogad also told employees in Saskatoon Transit Services to not talk to me. I phoned them to find out how many buses there are with programmable bus signs. I needed this information for my human rights complaint as well as an article I was writing on it. As a taxpayer who pays for Saskatoon Transit Services, I was entitled to ask them for this information. They told me that they had been instructed to not talk to me and referred me to the City Solicitor’s Office. This was clearly retaliation for my prayer recitation human rights complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint.

I didn’t know whether they also banned me from communicating with employees of other city services such as the Saskatoon Police Service, Parking Services, Saskatoon Transit Services, and Leisure Services Branch. This was left unclear and unanswered by the City Solicitor’s Office. When I asked city solicitor Patricia Warick whether they were banning me from communicating with other city departments, she said she doesn’t answer hypotheticals. This had the effect of discouraging me from being able to use city services because I didn’t know if I would get in trouble if I did. This was clearly retaliation for my prayer recitation human rights complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint.

Exhibit 2-1 is an email message from the City Solicitor’s Office dated January 3, 2014 in which they say that I shouldn’t engage in dialog with the City of Saskatoon about any matter except through the City Solicitor’s Office. 

Just because someone has a complaint or claim against the city, it doesn’t mean he suddenly can’t talk to his elected representatives anymore about other unrelated public policy issues and doesn’t mean employees of other city departments can’t talk to him anymore about unrelated operational issues. This is clearly retaliation by the City Solicitor’s Office for my prayer recitation human rights complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.

Retaliation for filing human rights complaints is considered a form of discrimination and strictly prohibited under Section 45 of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code:

Discrimination for taking part in proceedings under this Act prohibited

45 No person shall:

(a) refuse to employ or to continue to employ any person;

(b) threaten to dismiss or to penalize in any other way any person with respect to that person’s

employment or any term, condition or privilege thereof;

(c) discriminate against any person with respect to that person’s employment or any term,

condition or privilege thereof; or

(d) intimidate, retaliate against, coerce or impose any pecuniary or other penalty, loss or other

penalty, loss or disadvantage upon any person;

on the grounds that that person:

(e) has made or may make a complaint under this Act;

(f) has made or may make a disclosure concerning any matter complained of;

(g) has testified or may testify in a proceeding under this Act; or

(h) has participated or may participate in any other way in a proceeding under this Act.

1979, c.S-24.1, s.45; 2000, c.26, s.35.

Ashu M. G. Solo

Exhibit 2-1.  Email from City Solicitor’s Office dated Jan. 3, 2014

3. Human Rights Complaint #3: Ashu M. G. Solo v. City of Saskatoon (Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Office) and City of Saskatoon (Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee of Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee)

The City of Saskatoon’s Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Office holds an annual literary and art contest to promote respect for cultural diversity and improve race relations. This contest is called the Living in Harmony Contest. See

http://www.saskatoon.ca/DEPARTMENTS/Community%20Services/Communitydevelopment/Cultural%20Diversity%20and%20Race%20Relations/Pages/Cultural%20Diversity%20and%20Race%20Relations%20Month.aspx for information about the contest.

The City of Saskatoon’s Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee forms an ad hoc subcommittee to judge submissions to this contest. This ad hoc subcommittee is called the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee. I was a representative on the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee and a judge on the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee in 2012, so I know how the contest judging works.

Becky Kuffner, the cultural diversity and race relations coordinator from the City of Saskatoon’s Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Office, was supposed to give the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee the submissions and guided them through the judging process. I don’t know if she gave all of my submissions to the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee.

I submitted copies of each of my literary submissions with and without my name except for my literary submission about Christmas messages on buses. I didn’t provide a copy of my submission about Christmas messages on buses without my name because this literary submission was about one of my human rights complaints and everyone on the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee knows that I made this human rights complaint. The Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee is part of the Cultural

Diversity and Race Relations Committee, which deliberated my complaint. In an email to me, which is provided in exhibit 3-1, Becky Kuffner said that she provided the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee with my anonymous submission. This would mean that she didn’t provide them with all of my submissions or my literary submission about Christmas messages on buses. She had no grounds to not provide them with all of the submissions. This was obviously retaliation for my human rights complaints.

In the past, there have been six different categories in the Living in Harmony Contest: elementary school literary competition, high school literary competition, adult literary competition, elementary school art competition, high school art competition, and adult art competition. If there was only one entrant in a particular competition, that entrant would win by default as long as her work was not of really bad quality. The contest is barely advertised by the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Office and not advertised by the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee so there are very few 

submissions.

In 2013, they chose 10 winners and 1 honorable mention for the elementary school art competition, 2 winners for the elementary school literary competition, 1 winner for the high school art competition, 0 winners for the high school literary competition, 0 winners for the adult literary competition, and 0 winners for the adult art competition. See

http://www.saskatoon.ca/DEPARTMENTS/Community%20Services/Communitydevelopment/Documents/LIHAwards_2013.pdf for the list of winners. I am attaching the list of winners as exhibit 3-2. There were probably no entrants in the high school literary competition or adult art competition.

Becky Kuffner should have told the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee that they should pick a winner for the adult literary competition instead of picking so many winners for the elementary school art competition. Her explanation for this is in her email message in exhibit 3-1.

I entered the adult literary competition. If the judges on the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee of the City of Saskatoon’s Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee could find 10 winners and an honorable mention for the elementary school visual artwork competition, are we supposed to believe that they couldn’t find a single winner for the adult literary competition? This is totally ridiculous. I wasn’t born yesterday.

I know about the poor quality and quantity of submissions and how the contest and judging works because I was on the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee last year. I know that last year when there was a single entrant in a competition, that entrant won by default.

My work was of extremely high quality (I have over 500 publications). If I had the only submission in the adult literary competition, I should have won by default according to their past practices. They didn’t award honorable mentions in the past. Why did they award an honorable mention now in the elementary school visual artwork competition instead of picking a winner for the adult literary competition?

My essay about my complaint on Christmas messages on Saskatoon Transit buses should have won the adult literary contest. This essay was not anonymous because my name was on it, I referred to my actions with respect to the complaint, and everyone on the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee knows that I made this complaint because they were asked by City Council to come up with a policy regarding Christmas messages on buses. The judges on the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee of the City of Saskatoon’s Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee clearly didn’t want me to win.

I strongly believe that they denied me a win and picked extra winners for the elementary school competitions as retaliation for my prayer recitation human rights complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint. In fact, one of my entries was about the Christmas message human rights complaint and I later got this published in a slightly different form. I believe that the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Office may not have even given all of my submissions, particularly the submission about the Christmas message human rights complaint, to the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee to be judged.

I had three submissions to the adult literary category in 2012. The best of these was the one about the Christmas messaging on buses. I was a member of the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee in 2012 so I know how the judging works. In the past, there was one and only one winner in each category. In the past, if there was only one submission in a particular category, that submission won by default. But in 2013, there were no winners in the adult literary category. There should have been a winner in the adult literary category according to past practices. If I had the only submissions to the adult literary category, one of mine should have won by default according to past practices. But instead, they picked 10 winners and 1 honorable mention for the elementary school art category. Becky Kuffner cited this as the reason that there was no winner in the adult literary category as can be seen in her email message in exhibit 3-1. All I wanted is to be judged fairly. They obviously didn’t do so. Anyone can see that. The only reason they wouldn’t judge me fairly is as retaliation for my human rights complaints.

Once while I was on the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee, we were discussing different human rights concerns related to cultural diversity and race relations in Saskatoon. I brought up the school prayers that they had in Saskatoon Public Schools and brought up the funding of Catholic schools. Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee member Cornelia Laliberte, who works in the administration of the Catholic schools, complained later to Lynne Lacroix, community development manager, about me bringing up these issues even though we were discussing different human rights concerns related to cultural diversity and race relations in Saskatoon. What was her problem? She must not be happy that I criticized this. Cornelia Laliberte shouldn’t have been judging my submissions because it’s a conflict of interest.

Other subcommittee members who know me shouldn’t have been judging my submissions too because it’s a conflict of interest.

There were 10 winners for the elementary visual artwork contest and not a single winner of the adult literary contest because the winner would have been me and the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee didn’t want that to happen. This is clearly retaliation by the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee of the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee. The Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee clearly retaliated against me because they don’t like my prayer recitation human rights 

complaint and Christmas message human rights complaint with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commisssion.

Retaliation for filing human rights complaints is considered a form of discrimination and strictly prohibited under Section 45 of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code:

Discrimination for taking part in proceedings under this Act prohibited

45 No person shall:

(a) refuse to employ or to continue to employ any person;

(b) threaten to dismiss or to penalize in any other way any person with respect to that person’s

employment or any term, condition or privilege thereof;

(c) discriminate against any person with respect to that person’s employment or any term,

condition or privilege thereof; or

(d) intimidate, retaliate against, coerce or impose any pecuniary or other penalty, loss or other

penalty, loss or disadvantage upon any person;

on the grounds that that person:

(e) has made or may make a complaint under this Act;

(f) has made or may make a disclosure concerning any matter complained of;

(g) has testified or may testify in a proceeding under this Act; or

(h) has participated or may participate in any other way in a proceeding under this Act.

1979, c.S-24.1, s.45; 2000, c.26, s.35.

Ashu M. G. Solo

Exhibit 3-1. Email Message from Becky Kuffner dated Apr. 12, 2013

Ashu M. G. Solo

From: Kuffner, Becky (CY - Community Development) <Becky.Kuffner@Saskatoon.ca>

Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 2:07 PM

To: 'amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us'

Subject: RE: Submission for the Living in Harmony literary contest

Hi Ashu,

There are no stringent rules or guidelines that the committee must follow in terms of picking a winner for each category other than the budget restrictions. I did add your ‘anonymous’ submission to the adjudication as you had asked but given the number of submissions we received from elementary and secondary students and the effort and commitment on the part of the teachers to submit their entries the committee chose to honour two full classes of students this year. Mrs. Irinici’s grade 2/3 class and Mr. Elliott’s grade 7/8 class.

Thanks for inquiring,

Becky

Becky Sasakamoose Kuffner M.Ed

Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Coordinator

Treaty Six Territory

City of Saskatoon-Cosmo Civic Centre

3130 Laurier Drive Saskatoon

S7L 5J7

306.975.7826

becky.kuffner@saskatoon.ca

From: Ashu M. G. Solo

Sent: April 12, 2013 11:46 AM

To: Kuffner, Becky (CY - Community Development)

Subject: RE: Submission for the Living in Harmony literary contest

Hi Becky,

Why wasn’t there a winner for the Living in Harmony adult literary contest?

Ashu M. G. Solo

From: Web E-mail - Cultural Diversity

Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 12:49 PM

To: Ashu M. G. Solo

Subject: RE: Submission for the Living in Harmony literary contest

Hi Ashu,

Just letting you know I received your submission for the Living in Harmony awards and there is no problem with letting

the adjudicators review the work without your name attached to it, and you’re right you don’t need an adult advisor to

sign your entry form ?. Good luck!

Have a great day.

Becky

Becky Sasakamoose Kuffner M.Ed

Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Coordinator

Treaty Six Territory

City of Saskatoon-Cosmo Civic Centre

3130 Laurier Drive Saskatoon

S7L 5J7

306.975.7826

becky.kuffner@saskatoon.ca

From: Ashu M. G. Solo

Sent: February 27, 2013 12:35 AM

To: Web E-mail - Cultural Diversity

Subject: Submission for the Living in Harmony literary contest

Hi Becky,

I’m attaching an entry form and submission for the Living in Harmony literary contest in Adobe PDF format. I’m submitting two poems and an essay that I previously wrote for this contest. Because some members of the Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee might know me, to avoid a conflict of interest, I’m submitting copies of the poems with and without my name on them. You can let the judges review the copies of the poems without my name on them. It’s obvious that I wrote the essay so I didn’t include a copy of that without my name on it. I assume I don’t need an adult advisor to sign the entry form. If anything is filled out incorrectly on the entry form, let me know. I would appreciate if you confirm receiving this submission. 

Ashu M. G. Solo

Exhibit 3-2. Living in Harmony Contest Winners for 2013

Bus ads fine

Letter to the editor:  "Bus ads fine" by Ashu M. G. Solo in The StarPhoenix

http://www2.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/local/story.html?id=67ced49f-a9fe-467f-9ac2-392d882c8ff2

MEDIA ADVISORY: Solo Files Three New Human Rights Complaints against City of Saskatoon for Retaliation against Him

Transmitted At: 2013-12-18 01:29 http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/December2013/18/c5415.html

MEDIA ADVISORY: Solo Files Three New Human Rights Complaints against City of Saskatoon for Retaliation against Him

SASKATOON, SK, Dec. 18, 2013 /CNW/ - Ashu M. G. Solo has filed three new human rights complaints against the City of Saskatoon on December 17, 2013 with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission. These complaints are for retaliation against him by the City of Saskatoon for his prayer recitation civil rights case and Christmas message civil rights case. Retaliation for filing human rights complaints is considered a form of discrimination and strictly prohibited under section 45 of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code.

The first human rights complaint is against the City of Saskatoon (Executive Committee) for retaliating against Solo by not reappointing him to the Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee and not appointing him to another civic committee or board. The second human rights complaint is against the City of Saskatoon (City Solicitor’s Office) for retaliating against Solo by trying to deprive him of his right to directly communicate with members of City Council and by telling employees of other City of Saskatoon departments to not talk to him. The third human rights complaint is against the City of Saskatoon (Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Office) and City of Saskatoon (Living in Harmony Ad Hoc Subcommittee of Cultural Diversity and Race Relations Committee) for retaliating against Solo by not considering his submissions to the Living in Harmony Contest.

“Employees of the City of Saskatoon are clearly abusing their authority to retaliate against me for my civil rights cases,” Solo said. “This is disgraceful. Their retaliation makes me more determined to pursue my cases.”

Further information:

Ashu M. G. Solo
amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us

 

Just a beginning

Letter to the editor: "Just a beginning" by Ashu M. G. Solo in The StarPhoenix

http://www2.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/forum/story.html?id=f03ed341-43c4-4bd1-b677-7d6ae87d23c0

This letter was edited by the newspaper.

MEDIA ADVISORY: City of Saskatoon Rejects Prayer Policy and Forces Solo to Continue Proceeding with Prayer Recitation Case

MEDIA ADVISORY:  City of Saskatoon Rejects Prayer Policy and Forces Solo to Continue Proceeding with Prayer Recitation Case

SASKATOON, SK, Nov. 26, 2013 - In a cowardly move, the City of Saskatoon's Executive Committee, which is composed of the mayor and all councillors, decided on November 25, 2013 to not implement a prayer policy to prevent religious prayers at civic events.  Therefore, secularism activist Ashu M. G. Solo is being forced to continue with his prayer recitation case against the City of Saskatoon and Councillor Randy Donauer with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission (SHRC).

SHRC will consider the City of Saskatoon's frivolous and vexatious application for summary dismissal of Solo's case.  Solo expects the application for summary dismissal to be rejected.  Then Solo expects SHRC to make another attempt at mediation, but the City of Saskatoon and Donauer haven't participated in mediation so far.  Finally, Solo expects that SHRC will take his case to Court of Queen's Bench to be decided upon by a judge.

"What's the point of getting elected if a politician doesn't have the guts to stand up for what's right?" Solo asked.  "The Executive Committee caved to the public backlash.  I tried from the beginning to resolve this case in a cooperative manner.  Now they're forcing me to go all the way in the legal process.  The status quo will not prevail."

Solo will seek a judgment from the Court of Queen's Bench that has the effect of banning prayer recitations at government organized events throughout the province of Saskatchewan and that has significant persuasive value in other provinces.  This will also outlaw prayer recitations at the Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly and at Yorkton City Council meetings.

Further information:

Ashu M. G. Solo
amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us

Justin Trottier
Canadian Secular Alliance
info@secularalliance.ca

MEDIA ALERT: Solo's Response to Prayer Guidelines Proposed by City Solicitor's Office

From: Ashu M. G. Solo [mailto:amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us]
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 12:31 AM
Subject: MEDIA ALERT: Solo's Response to Prayer Guidelines Proposed by City Solicitor's Office

Dear Media:

In response to my prayer recitation case against the City of Saskatoon and Councillor Randy Donauer, the City Solicitor’s Office has suggested a pre-meal meditation and generic event meditation followed by a moment of silence for city events.  These will be considered by the Executive Committee, which is composed of the mayor and all councillors, at their meeting on Monday, November 25, 2013. 

The last 25 pages of the attached Executive Committee report, which can also be found at

http://saskatoon.ca/DEPARTMENTS/City%20Clerks%20Office/Boards%20and%20Committees/agendasandminutes/Pages/default.aspx, talk about the secularism issues I’ve raised in Saskatoon.  Their suggested pre-meal meditation and generic event meditation can be found on the second last page of this report or in Charles Hamilton’s StarPhoenix article at http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/City+pitches+inclusive+greeting+place+prayer/9197104/story.html.

After I filed this case with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, the City of Saskatoon has been forced to make an effort to be more inclusive, so my advisors, supporters, and I have already helped the City of Saskatoon become more respectful of diversity. 

If the city drops the idea of a moment of silence and makes a few minor word tweaks to the suggested pre-meal meditation and generic event meditation, I’m willing to drop my civil rights case against the City of Saskatoon and Randy Donauer.  I’m not looking for money in this case.

The pre-meal meditation suggested by the City Solicitor’s Office follows:

Let us together bow our heads.

We take this moment to pause, before the enjoyment of a meal well-prepared for our celebration, to recognize and appreciate the gifts from nature provided, the work of human hands contributed, and sacrifice represented for our benefit.

Each of us have our own beliefs. Whether we are thankful for the bounty provided by one God or many, from a great spirit energy that is common to us all, or simply from the good people behind the door to the kitchen, we are all together in this moment, full of the grace that comes from being thankful for a gift that is given.

May we all enjoy the gift that is the good meal before us.

Amen.

They have made more of an attempt to try to accommodate people of monotheistic religions, polytheistic religions, aboriginal spiritual people, atheists, and agnostics.  I would be willing to accept this pre-meal meditation if they drop the instruction to bow people’s heads and if they drop the word “amen.”  Bowing heads is not done in all religions and is certainly not done by atheists or agnostics.  “Amen” is a term used to end religious prayers in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.  The City Solicitor’s Office acknowledges in their report to the Executive Committee that the term “amen” is Christian in nature.

In addition to the pre-meal meditation, the City Solicitor’s Office has proposed a generic event meditation.  I don’t believe that the City of Saskatoon currently has generic event prayers, so I don’t see the need to add one now.  The City Solicitor’s Office is creating more problems by proposing a generic event meditation.  The generic event meditation suggested by the City Solicitor’s Office follows:

Thank you for life and the world, for everyone with whom we share this together.

Thank you for today. Let us choose today's goals wisely and live today perfectly.

Let us ensure that we love and respect ourselves and others.

Guide us through our lives to live gracefully.

Amen.

This generic event meditation is more focused on thanking a higher power or God and asking for guidance from a higher power or God, especially when they say “thank you for life and the world,” “thank you for today,” and “guide us through our lives to live gracefully.” Also, they should drop “amen.”  I would be willing to accept this generic event meditation if they replaced it with the following language:

Let us be thankful for life and the world and for everyone with whom we share this together.

Let us be thankful for today.  Let us choose today's goals wisely and live today perfectly.

Let us ensure that we love and respect ourselves and others.

Let us live our lives gracefully.

The mayor and councillors should accept my proposals, so they stop wasting taxpayer money and so their friend Donauer can put his legal problems behind him and focus on his bid to be one of Harper’s regressive lackeys.  Maybe I’ll run against Donauer in the next federal election.  Who else will have the guts to call him out on his religious discrimination and bigotry for initially insisting on having Christian prayer recitations at civic events?

If you have any questions, I can be reached at amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us.  You can also talk to Justin Trottier, spokesperson for the Canadian Secular Alliance and founder of the Centre for Inquiry Canada, at info@secularalliance.ca.  Justin is extremely familiar with this case. 

Best regards,

Ashu M. G. Solo

MEDIA ALERT: Solo Proposes Secular Thanks and Calls for Attempt at Mediation

From: Ashu M. G. Solo [mailto:amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us]
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 8:21 AM
To: amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us
Cc: city.solicitor@saskatoon.ca; shrc@gov.sk.ca
Subject: MEDIA ALERT: Solo Proposes Secular Thanks and Calls for Attempt at Mediation

Dear Media:

I’m willing to drop my civil rights case against the City of Saskatoon (Mayor’s Office) and Councillor Randy Donauer for prayer recitations at civic events if they eliminate prayer recitations or come up with a secular thanks that has wording agreed upon by me in settling the case, that doesn’t reference a God or higher power, and that isn’t spiritual. 

While a moment of silence is better than a Christian prayer recitation, I’m unwilling to accept an official moment of silence because this is still an attempt by the municipal government to get people to pray and thus still violates the freedom from religion inherent to freedom of religion.  If people want to pray before they eat, they can take their own moments of silence or even say prayers aloud to themselves.  Nobody cares.  Nobody is stopping them.  There doesn’t need to be an official moment of silence. 

The Executive Committee has indicated that it would like a more inclusive pre-meal prayer or thanksgiving.  If the city wants to have a pre-meal thanks that is inclusive to everybody and socially conscious, I suggest the following: 

Let us be thankful for this food and the time together.  Let us think of all of the people in this city, country, and world who do not have enough to eat.  Let us think of those who have barriers or burdens they need lifted.  Let us think of those whose lives we can improve through our work.  Let us strive to use our knowledge, skills, and talents to help all of these people.

This pre-meal thanks, which I wrote, is much more inclusive than a Christian prayer recitation.  The only reason they wouldn’t be okay with this is if they want to push religion or a belief in God(s) on people.

I call upon the City of Saskatoon and Donauer to attempt mediation with me at the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission to agree on a secular thanks that can then be approved by the city’s Executive Committee.  However, instead of attempting mediation with me, the City of Saskatoon is wasting taxpayer money with a frivolous and vexatious application for summary dismissal of my case.  This shows they don’t care about discrimination against religious minorities, spiritual people, agnostics, and atheists.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us.  You can also talk to my advisor Justin Trottier, spokesperson for the Canadian Secular Alliance and founder of the Centre for Inquiry Canada, at info@secularalliance.ca.

Best regards,

Ashu M. G. Solo

MEDIA ALERT: City of Saskatoon is trying to get Solo's prayer recitation case dismissed by Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission

From: Ashu M. G. Solo [mailto:amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us]
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 8:38 AM
To: amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us
Subject: MEDIA ALERT: City of Saskatoon is trying to get Solo's prayer recitation case dismissed by Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission

Dear Media:

I’m attaching a letter from the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission that I received yesterday evening for Ashu Solo v. City of Saskatoon (Mayor’s Office) and Councillor Randy Donauer.  Instead of dealing with the substance of my prayer recitation case, the City of Saskatoon is making a frivolous and vexatious application to get this case dismissed.  This is a disgraceful tactic to keep discriminating against people.  They’re wasting the time and money of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.

City of Saskatoon claims that the complaint was made in bad faith or for improper motives or is frivolous or vexatious.  Also, City of Saskatoon claims that there has been a lack of procedural fairness.  The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission and I have met all of the legally required deadlines. 

Procedural fairness demands that I be able to see the City of Saskatoon’s application for summary dismissal, so that I can see what arguments they are making and have a chance to respond to them.  I’m going to see if I can get a copy of the City of Saskatoon’s application for summary dismissal from the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.

If the City of Saskatoon is successful in getting this case dismissed on a technicality, I’ll just file a new case with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission next time they have a prayer recitation at a civic event that I attend.

Donauer claimed that councillors voted against covering his legal expenses, but this isn’t true.  Mayor Don Atchison and Donauer claimed that Donauer would be responsible for any legal expenses that he might incur.  The truth is an Indemnification Review Committee will decide if any legal expenses by Donauer will be covered.

If you have any questions for me, I can be reached at amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us.  You can also talk to Justin Trottier, spokesperson for the Canadian Secular Alliance and founder of the Centre for Inquiry Canada.  Justin is an advisor to me on this case and can be reached at info@secularalliance.ca.

I’ve asked for Judge David Arnot, chief commissioner of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, to recuse himself from dealing with my cases.  It is a conflict of interest for Arnot to be involved in this case and to be involved in deciding how to proceed with this case.  Arnot and Atchison gave speeches at an event to start the cultural diversity and race relations month in 2012 in Saskatoon.  In these speeches, I learned that Arnot and Atchison are friends and went to high school together.  Furthermore, in Arnot’s speech, he praised Atchison’s record on human rights, despite the fact that he must have known Atchison had been abusing his office to endorse a Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast by allowing this event to be named after his office and Atchison had lead the opposition to the contract termination of Chief Dave Scott for doing nothing about aboriginals being dumped outside the city by criminal cops in the Saskatoon Police Service.  Arnot’s long friendship with Atchison could affect his ability to be neutral and unbiased with a complaint that was originally against Atchison, Donauer, and the City of Saskatoon and is now against the City of Saskatoon (Mayor’s Office) and Donauer.  For these reasons, I’ve asked the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission to assign someone else to make the decisions on how to proceed with this case. 

However, instead of recusing himself from dealing with my cases, Arnot went on radio twice to talk about them.  Judges and human rights commission employees shouldn’t be talking to the media about cases in progress that they might be involved in.  I wonder why someone like Arnot who had the audacity to praise Atchison’s human rights record would even be in charge of a human rights commission.

Ashu Solo v. City of Saskatoon (Saskatoon Transit Services) for Christmas messages on buses isn’t over yet.  I’m going to take this case to the Court of Queen’s Bench when time permits.  The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission decides whether to pursue cases based only on the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code.  At the Court of Queen’s Bench, I can make arguments based on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  The guarantees of religious equality and multiculturalism in the Charter will give me a much stronger case.

Best regards,

Ashu M. G. Solo

MEDIA ALERT: Mayor Don Atchison has been lying to the media and public

From: Ashu M. G. Solo [mailto:amgsolo@mavericktechnologies.us]
Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 5:20 AM
Subject: MEDIA ALERT: Mayor Don Atchison has been lying to the media and public

Dear Media:

David Kirton on News Talk Radio found that Councillor Randy Donauer had been lying to him about whether or not Donauer will be responsible for his legal costs for my human rights complaint against Donauer and the City of Saskatoon (Mayor’s Office).  You can hear David Kirton talking about this at  http://ckom.com/sites/default/files/CKOM-StoonAfternoon-RandyDonauer-Oct3.mp3  The City of Saskatoon’s indemnification policy was amended by the Executive Committee on September 30, 2013.  As a result, Donauer would know in advance of hiring a lawyer whether or not his legal costs would be covered.  After hearing the segment above, it’s obvious that Mayor Don Atchison has been lying too on News Talk 650 CKOM, CBC Radio, and Global News.  Atchison has been repeatedly saying that Donauer will be responsible for all of his own legal costs.  According to the new indemnification policy discussed at the link above, we don’t know yet whether or not Donauer will be responsible for his legal costs if there are any.  You might want to report that Atchison has not been truthful to the media or public too.

The following interviews with Atchison took place after the indemnification policy was amended by the Executive Committee, so Donauer would know in advance of hiring a lawyer whether or not his legal costs would be covered.  You can hear Atchison lying that Donauer is responsible for all of his own legal costs during these time stamps at these links:

2 min. 55 sec. to 3 min. 30 sec. at http://ckom.com/sites/default/files/JGLCITYHALLHOTLINEOCT1.mp3  (Don Atchison interviewed by Murray Wood on John Gormley Live on News Talk Radio on October 1, 2013)

6 min. 40 sec. to 7 min. 12 sec. at http://www.cbc.ca/player/AudioMobile/Saskatoon%20Morning/ID/2409512635/  (Don Atchison interviewed by Leisha Grebinski on Saskatoon Morning on CBC Radio on October 1, 2013)

1 min. 40 sec. to 2 min. 10 sec. in the bottom video at http://globalnews.ca/news/875171/prayer-debate-takes-centre-stage-at-saskatoons-executive-committee/  (Don Atchison interviewed on Global News on October 1, 2013)

Best regards,

Ashu M. G. Solo