To: HRTO-Registrar (MAG) <hrto.registrar@ontario.ca>
Dated: March 29, 2024
We have an appointment with the Niagara Community Legal Clinic on April 19, 2023, at 10:00 am, thus we will require an extension of time past your deadline of April 26, 2024.
Once we have spoken with legal counsel and have obtained assistance in addressing your NOID for all parties involved, we will need to create our response and have it evaluated by the clinic at your implied request. This may take a few visits to perfect our response to your understanding.
Please verify receipt of this email and the extension of the deadline by 6 months as appointments seemed to being scheduled about a month from dated called.
From: HRTO-Registrar (MAG) <hrto.registrar@ontario.ca>
Dated: April 2, 2024
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) acknowledges receipt of the below email. Upon review, it does not appear that all parties were copied. As such, this communication is being returned to you.
In accordance with Rule 1.12 of the HRTO’s Rules of Procedure, all correspondence directed to the Registrar must be copied to all other parties.
Please copy all other parties. Once completed, you may refile your correspondence with the HRTO, together with confirmation that all parties have been copied or you may also provide a Form 23 Statement of Delivery confirming same.
Please note that this correspondence does not form part of your record of proceeding.
To: HRTO-Registrar (MAG) <hrto.registrar@ontario.ca>
Dated: April 2, 2024
First and foremost, I truly hope that I am able to express myself in a coherent manner that explains the particulars of our families concerns about the questionable behavior of HRTO and this unknown adjudicator.
As a 52 year old, Caucasian, male, born and raised in Canada, of English descent, who has ONLY written, read and spoken English HIS WHOLE LIFE. Who graduated from college and worked in the medical field and funeral industry with great communication success for many years. I can understand where your confusion and inability to understand a HRTO compliant presented and written in common English comes from.
I will try my hardest to make this document as concise as possible for you. I will use as many pint-sized words and explanations for you, so that the HRTO and this unknown adjudicator don’t get overwhelmed, and you can hopefully comprehend the words and their meanings to what is being written.
I will try my best to do what I can with my limited ability to express my thoughts in a clearly manner. I will try with every fiber of my soul to describe each incident of our concerns about the HRTO and this unknown adjudicator’s prejudice and tilted behavior in chronological order, including the dates, places and people involved.
With that said, let do a quickly recap.
On February 27, 2024, Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell, the attorney for the DSBN, was accidently exposed and discovered to be try to covertly correspond with the HRTO and the unknown adjudicator via email and letter asking for a “hasty” review and final decision/order while deliberately not including our family in the correspondence.
Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell presented this calculated email and letter to the HRTO and the unknown adjudicator requesting a decision/order that would ONLY be advantageous to both her and the DSBN.
The facts are that the only reason our family learned about this covert email and letter is because on February 29, 2024 the HRTO inadvertently included our family in their reply to Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell underhanded request.
The HRTO response to Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell’s covert efforts to getting in touch by stating;
Remember that Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell is Black female, who is an experienced Human Rights Lawyer, who makes a career out of defending employers before the Human Rights Tribunal, at labor arbitrations and in courts when issues of racism are made against them.
Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell is obviously VERY knowledgeable about the protocols that are in place when working with the HRTO. So why did she try and send this covert email and letter if not for nefarious reasons?
At no point in the HRTO email to Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell does it state;
In fact the HRTO decided to conveniently and deliberately ignore – Rules of Procedure 1.2 as it would have specifically exposed and stopped Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell wicked behavior. As this section would have immediately addressed this very outrageous behavior by Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell.
And at this point our family immediately requested clarification from the HRTO, they wanted to know if there were;
And within this same March 01, 2024 email requesting clarification. Our family filed two Form 10’s – Request for an Order During Proceedings requesting;
And not only did the HRTO and this unknown adjudicator deliberately fail to acknowledge the receipt of our families email and two Form 10’s. They have subsequently continued to ignore them for the past 32 days as if they do not exist.
Now on February 27, 2024 the HRTO sent our family 4 very telling NOID (Notice of Intent to Dismiss) stating that;
With the receipt of these 4 NOID emails, our family replied with an email on March 29, 2024 requesting an extension of time stating;
On April 2, 2024 the HRTO responded back with;
So now that we are all caught up with the current insidious actions of the HRTO, their unknown adjudicator and Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell.
We now can address what appears to be again the every questionable behavior and actions on the behalf of the HRTO and this same unknown adjudicator.
First, it was noticed by our family that Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell was NOT inadvertently attached to the newest email on April 2, 2024 from the HRTO to our family in regards to our request for extension of time.
This again seems to vindicate that we were never intend to receive the February 29, 2024 email from the HRTO to Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell addressing her underhanded request.
It also appears that the HRTO now wants to quote the same Rules of Procedure 1.2 that they choose to conveniently and deliberately ignored when they knew that it would have exposed the questionable behavior of Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell and the HRTO in their attempts to covertly communicate with each other.
When our family brought this very issue to the HRTO attention back on February 27, 2024. The HRTO position was;
And now what appears to be some form of a tactic, the HRTO is willing to state to us;
So again our family will ask; is there
And why was Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell never required to “refile” her secret email and letter before or after she got caught under section 1.2?
It appears that the HRTO, this unknown adjudicator and Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell are acting in tandem and in bad faith. Because these most recent actions by the HRTO and this unknown adjudicator are clearly demonstrating there are two sets of rules being used, one for Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell and one for our family.
1. With that said, we would like clarification from the HRTO and this unknown adjudicator as to what process is the correct process? As it is clear that the HRTO is giving inaccurate messages in their actions and behavior when deal with each party. Does Rule 1.2 apply to everyone or does it not?
2. We are also again requesting, via our Form 10’s that they are addressed immediately and are prepared in a coherent narrative that explains the particulars of why Njeri Damali Sojourner-Campbell was granted this special privilege? The explanation must clearly describe the incident of improper behavior in chronological order, including the date, place and people involved. This statement can be more than five (5) pages long.
And as this unknown adjudicator is a public employee, who works for us, the tax payers, and is making decisions that are nonsensical, incoherent and clearly bias against our family and son.
3. We wish to know the name of this public official as he/she does not get the privilege of collecting tax payer’s money and being able to hide from the consequences of their questionable actions.The HRTO does not have the right to hide, conceal or obstruct the identity of any public official, who works for, or makes decisions in, the interest of the public. The HRTO cannot offer any employee immunity to scrutiny for their actions from the same public he/she serves and who pays them.
4. Our family – Under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) and the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA), have a right to request information from certain public-sector institutions in Ontario.
5. We would like ALL the names of ANY individuals the HRTO has spoken to about our HRTO applications that do not work inside the HRTO. The topic of the discussions is not important right now. Just the names, job titles/professions and dates will do.