Pubdate: Thu, 18 Dec 2014
Source: Georgia Straight, The (CN BC)
Copyright: 2014 The Georgia Straight
Contact:  http://www.straight.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1084
Author: Carlito Pablo

VICTORIA POLICE OFFICER AND DRUG LEGALIZATION ADVOCATE TO GET B.C. 
HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL HEARING

THE B.C. HUMAN Rights Tribunal has noted that a police department 
restricted the off-duty activities of an officer who believes in 
ending the war on drugs.

In a decision today (December 16), tribunal member Robert Blasina 
wrote that there is "no dispute" that the Victoria Police Department 
sought and continues to limit the public advocacy of Const. David 
Bratzer when he's not in uniform.

The question that remains is whether or not the VicPD contravened the 
B.C. Human Rights Code.

"At a hearing, the Tribunal will be concerned with whether the 
Respondents have gone too far," Blasina wrote in the decision.

Bratzer is a spokesperson for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, an 
international organization of current and former criminal justice 
professionals who are in favour of drug legalization.

In 2013, Bratzer filed a complaint of discrimination in the area of 
employment on the ground of political belief.

Named as respondents were the VicPD, then chief constable and now 
retired Jamie Graham, and Inspector Jamie Pearce.

As the tribunal member summarized, Bratzer claimed that the 
respondents "have attempted to seize control of his private life, and 
have gone beyond the normal bounds of an employer's scope of control".

Blasina noted that there "seems to be no dispute" that Bratzer 
upholds existing antidrug laws as a Victoria police officer 
"regardless of his personal opinion about them".

"However, he presents himself to the public as opposed to the laws he 
is employed to uphold. That he expresses his beliefs outside of 
working hours, does not unequivocally excuse him from the scrutiny of 
his employer," the tribunal member wrote.

Blasina continued: "It is trite law that an employer has an interest 
in an employee's conduct (including speech) outside of the workplace 
when that conduct may be prejudicial to the interests or reputation 
of the employer."

Although Blasina makes no finding yet whether or not the human rights 
code was contravened, he granted the application to drop Graham and 
Pearce as individual respondents.

According to the tribunal member, Graham and Pearce acted "within the 
scope of their managerial authority on behalf of the VicPD".

The complaint will proceed with VicPD as sole respondent.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom