மசோதா 104 என்றால் என்ன
Bill 104 2021
An Act to proclaim Tamil Genocide Education Week
The Tamil community in Ontario is one of the largest concentrations of Tamils outside southeast Asia. It stretches across the province but the highest concentration is in the Greater Toronto Area. Tamil-Ontarians play an important role in the social, economic and political fabric of the province.
Tamil-Ontarians have families still suffering in their homeland in the north and east of the island of Sri Lanka. They have lost their loved ones and have been physically or mentally traumatized by the genocide that the Sri Lankan state perpetrated against the Tamils during the civil war which lasted from 1983 to 2009, and especially so in May of 2009. Genocide is the deliberate and organized killing of a group or groups of people, with the intention of destroying their identity as an ethnic, cultural or religious group. Acts of genocide against the Tamils started in 1948 after Sri Lanka gained its independence and were perpetrated through Sinhala-Buddhist centric government policies, pogroms, land grabs and ethnic cleansing. The United Nations Organization estimates that in May 2009 alone about 40,000 to 75,000 Tamil civilians were killed. Other estimates place the death toll at 146,679 civilians. These figures only reflect the death toll in 2009 leading up to May 18, the day on which the civil war ended. The loss of Tamil civilian lives during the genocide, which continued for decades in Sri Lanka, is much higher.
In addition, the Sri Lankan state has systematically disenfranchised the Tamil population of their right to vote and to maintain their language, religion and culture. For example, the Sinhala Only Act of 1956 made Sinhalese the official language of Sri Lanka ignoring the 29 per cent of the population whose primary language was Tamil, thereby putting them at a serious disadvantage for participating in the public service of Sri Lanka.
It is important for many reasons to acknowledge publicly that the killings and all aspects of the genocide constitute a heinous act. Not only does this acknowledgement honour the lives that were lost, but it gives a sense of hope to those who have suffered since it represents the first step to healing and reconciliation. Most importantly, by recognizing the Tamil genocide, we affirm our collective desire to maintain awareness of this genocide and other genocides that have occurred in world history in order to prevent such crimes against humanity from happening again.
Therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Ontario, enacts as follows:
Tamil Genocide Education Week
1 (1) The seven-day period in each year ending on May 18 is proclaimed as Tamil Genocide Education Week.
(2) During that period, all Ontarians are encouraged to educate themselves about, and to maintain their awareness of, the Tamil genocide and other genocides that have occurred in world history.
மசோதா 104 (சட்ட வரைபு) – தமிழ் இன அழிப்பு அறிவூட்டல் வாரத்தை முடக்க போடப்பட்டிருக்கும் புதிய வழக்கு பற்றியும், மசோதா 104ஐ ஆதரித்து இடையீடர்களாக வாதாட கனடியத் தமிழர் தேசிய அவை எடுத்துள்ள முயற்சி பற்றியும் கலந்தாய்வு
Group loses court challenge of bill proclaiming Tamil Genocide Education Week
Applicants argued Bill 104 breached their rights under ss. 2(b) and 15 of the Charter
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has dismissed a lawsuit challenging the constitutional validity of Ontario’s proclamation of “Tamil Genocide Education Week.”
In Sri Lankan Canadian Action Coalition et al. v. Attorney General of Ontario, 2022 ONSC 3849, several organizations and members of Ontario’s Sinhalese diaspora brought applications seeking a declaration that the Tamil Genocide Education Week Act (Bill 104) is unconstitutional.
Bill 104 designates May 12 to 18 each year as the “Tamil Genocide Education Week.” During that period, all Ontarians are encouraged to educate themselves about the alleged genocide against Tamils during the civil war in Sri Lanka and other genocides worldwide.
In particular, the applicants argued that since no Tamil genocide has been recognized under international criminal law standards, Bill 104 was ultra vires and breached their rights under ss. 2(b) and 15 of the Charter.
In its decision, the Superior Court dismissed the applications and found that Bill 104 was not ultra vires and did not violate the applicants’ rights under ss. 2(b) and 15.
In resolving the matter, the court first looked into the proper characterization of Bill 104. It found that while Bill 104 recognizes a Tamil genocide, “it is not just recognition for recognition’s sake.”
According to the court, the evidence showed that the recognition of a Tamil genocide was in service of educating the public about the Tamil genocide and other genocides worldwide, including the need to prevent such atrocities from occurring in the future.
“Given my finding that [Bill 104’s] purpose is educative, it falls squarely within Ontario’s jurisdiction under s. 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867 to exclusively make laws in relation to education,” Justice Jasmine Akbarali wrote.
TMU hires former chief justice to review law school students’ open letter on Hamas attack, Israel
Man with unauthorized access to solicitor-client communications barred from defending application
Ontario considers non-disclosure agreement ban for workplace sexual harassment and violence
The court ruled that Bill 104 did not violate the applicants’ right to free expression under s. 2(b) of the Charter because governments are not mandated to promote, enhance, or preserve the effectiveness of anyone’s political expression and may enter the marketplace of ideas to offer messages that counter expression.
In this case, the court noted that the Ontario legislature is entitled to enter the marketplace of ideas to recognize a Tamil genocide, and nothing in Bill 104 restricts or limits the expression the applicants can engage with. Thus, their expression was not suppressed in any way.
For claims under s. 15 of the Charter to succeed, the court determined that a two-part test must be met. The claimant must show at the first stage of the test that the impugned law imposes differential treatment based on protected grounds. At the second stage, the claimant must establish that the distinction has the effect of reinforcing, perpetuating or exacerbating disadvantage.
As to the first stage, the applicants claimed that Bill 104 created distinctions based on ethnic or national origin and religion – in that it blamed Sinhalese-Buddhists for the atrocities committed against Tamils during the Sri Lankan civil war, framing them as oppressors in a genocide. The court did not think so.
“But even if the recognition of a Tamil genocide through the enactment of Tamil Genocide Education Week could be said to create a benefit for Tamil Ontarians, there is no distinction in [Bill 104] based on an enumerated or analogous ground,” Justice Akbarali wrote.
The court explained that the perpetrator of the genocide recognized in Bill 104 is the Sri Lankan government. Therefore, a claim or a finding of genocide perpetrated by a government or a state “does not tar individuals who may be members of the same nationality, ethnicity, or religious affiliation as those people who dominate the government or state in question.”
The court also found that since the applicants failed to establish any discriminatory impacts related to Bill 104, the second stage of the test had not been met.
“The applicants’ evidence does not establish a nexus or causal connection between [Bill 104] and the incidents that the applicants have experienced as discriminatory as Ontarians who belong to the Sinhalese-Buddhist diaspora,” Justice Akbarali wrote.
News source:lawtimes news