Administrative Punishments To Impose Silence

 Let me emphasize a critical point from the early stages of my article; I am not interested in the political debate focused on who is right and who is wrong in the conflict pitting Palestinians against The State of Israel. My key concern is “Freedom of Expression/Speech”, and how administrators destroy lives and careers simply because professionals under their jurisdiction voice a politically questionable opinion, or the opinion is voiced in an unrefined crude way, basically calling a spade A SPADE.

To the reader let me clarify also that the stories I will be detailing did not unfold in the “Totalitarian Regime” of North Korea, nor did it happen in the old days of The Soviet Union, when criticizing the Communist Party unavoidably condemned the citizen for a lengthy stay in one the infamous Gulags of The USSR.

The tragedy I call a betrayal of a Canadian citizen’s fundamental right of “Freedom of Speech” was made in Canada, and right under the nose of millions of Canadians who sat in the margins and with their indifference and silence allowed evil to triumph.

“The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing”
[Edmund Burke]

Now let me move into specifics;

a) Dr. Yipeng Ge,"...suspended from his medical residency at the University of Ottawa after posting pro-Palestinian messages on social media that were also critical of Israel."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/university-ottawa-doctor-suspended-palestine-petition-1.7034464

b) Dr. Ben Thomson, a nephrologist at Mackenzie Richmond Hill Hospital, was suspended from his job, multiple threats were registered on his voice mail system, and his residence's address was shared online to intimidate him and compel him to put an end to his pro-Palestinian views posted on multiple social media platforms.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/doctor-doxed-suspended-palestinian-posts-1.7001887

Not a single Federal or Provincial Official  dared to argue that doctors should be suspended only for professional misconduct causing harm to patients, not for expressing political views that may offend a small segment of the Canadian population. Federal and Provincial officials, with brains on a "Selective Amnesia" mode, forgot the following critical warning of The Supreme Court of Canada:"..the very lifeblood of democracy is the free exchange of ideas and opinions...Government overreach, censorship, and suppression are dangerous to democracy and to human rights." The overreach of hospital administrators and their obsessive quest to silence dissenting doctors, so far did not alarm anyone and the erosion of basic freedoms are alive and blossoming in Canada.

Contrast the “Pro-Palestinian” views expressed by the two doctors, and the punishments inflicted by the administrators of the two hospitals, to the heinous crimes committed by Anesthesiologist Dr. George Doodnaught, who committed a long list of sexual assaults of patients under his direct care while in “The Recovery Room”.

21 patients were sexually assaulted and/or molested (tip of the iceberg only). Multiple complaints were filed. Nothing significant was done, especially by the head of the Department of Anesthesiology, who knew before any other high ranking hospital administrator about the criminal conduct of Dr. George Doodnaught. “The hospital’s chief of anesthesiology was aware of the complaints but the senior hospital administration only learned of them after the 2010 complaint was made.” It took three more years of suffering and humiliating sexual abuses to finally involve the Police and arrest Dr. Doodnaught in 2013.

https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/anesthesiologist-dr-george-doodnaught-guilty-of-sexually-assaulting-21-female-patients/article_54a86295-408e-513c-bc14-654a46fc4e2f.html  

Hospital administrators, Condo management administrators, or any other type of administration inclined to hide unethical, immoral, or criminal behavior should be denounced and condemned. And the most important tool we need to fight unethical, immoral, or criminal behavior is “Freedom of Expression”. Evil will reign supreme if we don’t fight any administration intent on destroying our “Inalienable Right” to exercise freedom of expression/speech.

For those who are not familiar with the legal concept known as “Inalienable Rights", the following is a good definition that could be relied upon to understand the set of rights that cannot be revoked with the stroke of a pen, or an administrative decree:

"Personal rights held by an individual which are not bestowed by law, custom, ..., and which cannot be taken or given away, or transferred to another person, are referred to as “inalienable rights.” 

n.b.
Anonymous comments will not be published. A name and an email address must be provided. If you suspect that your views are resting on shaky grounds and may fail to comply with basic rules of logical reasoning, do not make any comments.

Should A Lawyer Protect The Ego Of A Client Or The Vested Interest Of A Client?

 Disclaimer:

“This article is a work of fiction. Any similarity to a Condo Corporation and its Board of Directors, persons (living or dead), or actual events, is purely coincidental. While reading the article, remain focused on the notion that reality is often stranger than fiction, and the social environment that generates a set of “Real" conflicts, is the very same social environment that creates the fictional article.”

====================================

In this fictional scenario the “Plaintiff” is a Condo owner who requested from the Board of Directors, under the provisions of “Reasonable Accommodation”, the lowering of an unusually high and uneven speed bump located in the underground parking lot of the Condo.

Plaintiff’s wife suffers from a medical condition known as Osteoporosis and the  impact, of crossing a speed bump, can trigger a fracture in the spine due to the vertical pressure passengers are exposed to upon the landing of the rear wheels of a car on the ground.

From a financial point of view, the cost of lowering the speed bump is equal to or less than the amount invested in “The Christmas Party” organized by The Board/Management Company for the unit owners/residents of the Condominium.

The Board (Defendant) hired an “Engineer” to argue that speed bumps are not regulated by specific standards, and though the location of the speed bump is “Unusual” (located under an exit door), instead of being a few meters before the door, The Board feels no obligation to introduce any changes.

When the Plaintiff reminded the Defendant that under the rules of “Reasonable Accommodation” The Board should lower the speed bump, a lawyer was retained to convey the following details to the Plaintiff:

If your wife wishes to request human rights accommodation, for example on the basis of disability, please provide us with medical documentation which specifies:

a) The nature of your wife’s disability or disabilities (specific diagnosis is strictly required);
b) Your wife’s need or needs that are caused by or related to said disability or disabilities, in the context of her request for accommodation being made to the Corporation;
c) Whether any other form(s) of accommodation would be sufficient to accommodate your wife’s disability-related need(s), other than modifying the speed bump in question; and
d) What exact height the speed bump should be, in order to accommodate for her disability or disabilities.

If the above-noted information is received, the Corporation’s Board of Directors will review the information in a respectful and confidential manner, and we will advise your wife of the Board’s decision accordingly.

Please note that although the Corporation will reasonably review and assess the request as part of its procedural duty to accommodate, the Corporation may ultimately decide to deny the request or grant only a modified version of the accommodation requested.

After studying carefully the info conveyed by the Defendant’s lawyer, the Condo owner (Plaintiff) decided to decline the offer made by the lawyer for the following reasons:

1) Medical reports are never provided free of charge, neither by a family physician nor by a specialist treating a patient. Doctors are quick to point out that “Reports" are not covered by OHIP. Multiple reports must be submitted, and the final cost of satisfying the condition imposed by the lawyer can well cross the boundary of $1,500 and involve countless visits and hours wasted in clinics and hospitals, if new imaging tests are requested by the specialists.

2) Plaintiff has no incentive to invest money, time, and effort for a half-baked commitment made by The Board that does not guarantee any meaningful change to the status quo. Remember the words used by the lawyer:
“Please note that although the Corporation will reasonably review and assess the request as part of its procedural duty to accommodate, the Corporation may ultimately decide to deny the request or grant only a modified version of the accommodation requested.”

3) What can guarantee a better outcome for the Plaintiff is the reliance on the services of a “Personal Injury Lawyer” who will, use the medical reports to drag the Defendant to a court of law, to seek financial compensation for the psychological and physical pain and suffering inflicted on the Plaintiff’s wife, due to the obsession of The Board with the notion of “No One Can Tell Us What To Do”. We Decide how to introduce change and when to introduce it, not the Condo owner.
It is obvious, from the point of view of the Plaintiff that the conditions imposed were designed to satisfy the ego of The Board Members. The Lawyer, instead of advising the defendant, about the “Personal Injury Lawyer” scenario that can be pursued by the Plaintiff, decided to caress the ego of The Board members, knowing well that locking horns in a court of law can inflict thousands of dollars in damages that will be paid by the 175 unit owners of The Condominium.

In the legal profession, all lawyers agree or pay “Lip Service” to the notion that professionalism starts by discerning and defending  the interests of a client, not the EGO of a client. To all those in the legal profession who fail to act and protect the long-term interest of a client, read carefully the following statement of Chief Justice Warren K. Winkler:

[He is] a mere technician, whose relationship to the client amounts to nothing other than a casual, superficial commercial transaction."

================================

n.b.
Anonymous comments will not be published. A name and an email address must be provided. If you suspect that your views are resting on shaky grounds and may fail to comply with basic rules of logical reasoning, do not make any comments.

 

Libel & Defamation; The Verdict of The Supreme Court of Canada

 In general, lawyers who convey to Condo owners threats of “Cease-And-Desist” followed by a stern warning to keep your mouth shut about the shortcomings of The Board of Directors and/or The Management Company, do so with a condescending attitude based on the assumption that the Condo owner is nothing short of an idiot who has no clue about the rules and regulations of the realm, and The Supreme Court of Canada, for a Condo owner, is the newest brand name of a chocolate bar introduced to the Canadian market.

Often, lawyers do not take into consideration the fact that a Condo owner may not have a fancy professional designation at the end of his name, such as a juris doctor (J.D.) or bachelor of laws (LL.B), but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the Condo owner lives in an information vacuum dominated by an ignorance of the laws.

A lengthy introduction to highlight the fact that journalists, and Public Interest Bloggers (PIB), cannot perform their duties without understanding the scope of their obligations and the legal ramifications of their publications. We do not need the derision of lawyers, nor intimidations to realize that we face “Serious Risks”, often with dire consequences, especially when confronting law firms and corporations with deep pockets that can easily destroy a Public Interest Journalist (PIJ)/Blogger with lengthy lawsuits designed to bankrupt the person, and force him/her to refrain from revealing the truth about Corporate corruption, unethical modes of operations, and sheer contempt of the collective good by a culture of greed obsessed with profit.

We carry our mission with courage, and for us “Courage is not the absence of fear. It is the dedication to make the right move despite the presence of FEAR.” Our fears have been partially alleviated by The Supreme Court of Canada, when the highest Court in the realm declared in 2009 that Journalists/Public Interest Bloggers (PIB) can use the defence of "Responsible Communication" when facing defamation/libel law suits.

In a nutshell, The Supreme Court of Canada declared that a Journalist or a PIB can be absolved from any liability (a) if an attempt was made to verify the facts, and (B) the published material is a matter of public interest.  

Of course prior to publishing an article, I do solicit the opinion of the parties allegedly involved in wrongdoings, and I do consider the issues I promote through my articles as matters of “Public Interest”, because undeniably for almost 90% of Condo owners, their apartment/property is the biggest investment of their lives. Board of Directors and Management Companies adopt measures an decisions that can have a very serious impact on the biggest investment of a Condo owner, thus the vigilance and the need to hold the 4th Government, The Board, accountable for any neglect of duty that may endanger life and property.

Without freedom of speech we cannot seek accountability. Without accountability power can become blind, destructive, and used and abused for the profit of the few at the expense of the multitude facing the risk of losing their biggest investment that required decades of hard work to reach the “Mortgage Free Dwelling” status. 

n.b.
Anonymous comments will not be published. A name and an email address must be provided. If you suspect that your views are resting on shaky grounds and fail to comply with basic rules of logical reasoning, do not make any comments.

Open Letter To The Lawyer Of The Corporation

 Disclaimer:

“This article is a work of fiction. Any similarity to a Condo Corporation and its Board of Directors, persons (living or dead), or actual events, is purely coincidental. While reading the article, remain focused on the notion that reality is often stranger than fiction, and the social environment that generates a set of “Real" conflicts, is the very same social environment that creates the fictional article.”

=============================

Dear Madam/Sir,

Correct me if I am wrong, because I am relying on info from the mid 1980s, LSAT was an exam designed to assess the logical faculties of a person contemplating a career in the legal profession. None of the extensive list of questions a potential candidate had to struggle with, were pertinent to “Law”. In other words, a future lawyer was expected to be more adept at logical reasoning rather than the sheer memorization of rules and regulations.

What is your professional view (logical explanation) of the following phenomenon:

A builder finishes the construction of a condo. Buyers start moving into their units in late 2016. In 2017 Management Company X, selected by the builder/developer creates the first Board of Directors composed of 5 members reflecting the “Ethnic” composition of the 175 owners in the building.

In 2019, a new management company shows up on the scene, Board membership shrinks from 5 to 3, all belonging to the same “Ethnic” group that owns the management company.

From 2019 to 2024 Board members, now ethnically homogeneous, fail to notice that other “Ethnic” groups exist in the building. While using the elevators, the common areas, the underground parking lots, and possibly the gym all three Board members never encounter anyone from another “Ethnic” group, thus they become averse to change (expanding the membership to 5) and too comfortable with the idea that there is nothing wrong with the Status Quo, and if there are no complaints expressed we don’t have to take any initiative to introduce “Diversity” into our ranks.

Joins and encourages “The Group Think”, the desire to create conformity, the Management Company, that also fails to notice that The Board looks to an outside observer like an exclusive “Private Club”.

Now the $1000 question about the previous scenario:

What are the chances that everything described is sheer coincidence; 1in a 1000, 1 in 10,000 or 1 in a million? What are the odds that human volition had nothing to do in creating and maintaining the Status Quo-the discrimination to keep the Board ethnically homogeneous?

Although the questions above are addressed to the “Fictitious” lawyer of the Corporation, readers who have a strong mathematical inclination, or are experts in “Statistical Analysis” are more than welcome to provide an answer.

Respectfully,

Perplexed Condo Owner, Narkhan, ON

=================================

n.b.
Anonymous comments will not be published. A name and an email address must be provided. If you suspect that your views are resting on shaky grounds, and fail to comply with basic rules of logical reasoning, do not make any comments.

Eliminating A Risk. Why 007?

 In my previous article I referred to the following statement received from The Corporation’s lawyer:

“...Your blog does not need to explicitly name the Management or the Board to defame them; if a reader can surmise from your blog who they are, then you could be held liable for defamation nonetheless.”

Since there was a very remote chance that a reader will manage to connect a three-digit number to a specific Condominium Corporation located in a very specific city in Ontario, I selected randomly 007. All future articles will be about HYPOTHETICAL cases designed to develop awareness about critical issues affecting Condo Owners, and should not be construed as an attempt to blame a specific Condo Corporation for failing to protect the collective interests of a Condo Community.

Please do not leave comments asking me for applications to join His Majesty’s Secret Service (MI6). 007 was randomly selected to highlight the point that the very same dangers encountered in the world of espionage, can exist in a condominium environment. After all, protecting vested interests is the name of the game in the espionage industry. Protecting the vested interests of the Board is the name of the game in the “Condo Industry”. Both industries have nothing to do with the “Collective Good”.

A blogger or an investigative journalist (IJ) is like an “Intelligence Agent” (IA). IA collects info, analyzes the details, and disseminate the conclusions to political decision makers that are supposedly dedicated to serve the “Collective Good” or the National Security of a country.

IJ collects, analyzes, and disseminates information to the public to generate an awareness about an issue that undermines public interests. In other words the IA and IJ use the same methodology for different goals.

When the authority of the State is challenged, IAs are used to neutralize/eliminate dissenting voices labelled “Enemies of The State”. When too much criticism is expressed about The Board, depending on the severity of the criticism, The Board relies on a long list of actors and measures to nip in the bud “Freedom of Expression”.

I can write volumes about the common denominators shared by Boards and State actors, but I will postpone it for another occasion. The only point I need to highlight before wrapping up my article is the fact that in Canada, The Board of Directors of a Condominium Corporation is considered the 4th Government, with powers to collect money, to pass rules and regulations, and literally confiscate and sell your property if you fail to pay your monthly “Maintenance Fees”.

Like all governments The Board has three “Cardinal” obligations:
a) To protect lives.
b) To protect property.
c) To adopt rules, regulations, and decisions that are compatible with The Canadian Charter of Rights, and a set of other Anti-Discrimination Laws passed by different governments.

One more time, please don’t leave comments requesting applications to join His Majesty’s Secret Service (MI6).

n.b.
Anonymous comments will not be published. A name and an email address must be provided.
If you suspect that your views are resting on shaky grounds, and fail to comply with basic rules of logical reasoning, do not make any comments.

Pain & Suffering In A Condo Environment

The article was removed due to a "Cease-And-Desist" order received from the Board's lawyer.The following key points were stated in the letter:

You must immediately and permanently cease-and-desist from making false allegations against
[The Management Company] and the Board. You must immediately and permanently remove any harassing or defamatory content that you have published on your Blog, and you must permanently refrain from publishing any other harassing or defamatory content on your Blog or any other public forum about [The Management Company] or the Board.

If you fail to comply with the above demands and/or there are further violations of the Act or the
governing documents by you, the Corporation will commence legal proceedings against you without any further notice. If such legal proceedings are commenced, the Corporation will seek all of its legal costs on a full indemnity basis against you and/or add such litigation costs to your Unit’s common expenses which will be recoverable by way of condominium lien if necessary. In our experience, such costs could amount to several tens of thousands of dollars.

You are liable for all of the Corporation’s legal costs incurred to date in this enforcement matter against you for your unlawful harassment. If you fail to comply with the demands set out above and/or there are further violations of the Act or the governing documents by you, the Corporation may charge back your Unit for its legal costs incurred in this enforcement matter. The Corporation’s legal costs in this enforcement matter are $904.00 ($800 + HST) to date, but this amount is only as of the date of this letter and is therefore subject to change in the future.

To the objection I made that my article does not identify a person or any party by name, address, etc...the Corporation’s lawyer emailed on April 05/24 the following reply:

“...Your blog does not need to explicitly name the Management or the Board to defame them; if a reader can surmise from your blog who they are, then you could be held liable for defamation nonetheless.

We trust that you will immediately and permanently remove the harassing and defamatory content from your blog, and that you will refrain from further harassment and/or defamation.”

The lawyer of the Corporation does not consider the move made by The Board to pursue the “Cease-And-Desist” warning a SLAPP legal maneuver. For more details about SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) use the following link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation 

n.b.
Anonymous comments will not be published. A name and an email address must be provided.
If you suspect that your views are resting on shaky grounds, and fail to comply with basic rules of logical reasoning, do not make any comments.

 

 

 

 

NEW LOCATION (NARKHAN-Fictional City) SAME OLD PROBLEMS

 YES, we moved from Toronto to Narkhan, but it seems that a set of chronic problems are consistently part and parcel of the “Condo Industry”, simply because when power and money are present in the same environment, they have a tendency to undermine moral principles and ethical values, paving the way for conflicts that impact negatively the quality of life in a Condo Community.

The next article is the best example of what blind exercise of power can do, especially when decision makers cannot tell the difference between managing a building and establishing a caring community where the ultimate focus is alleviating pain based on the principles of “Reasonable Accommodations”, instead of peddling via a twisted logic and a set of wrong assumptions the narrative that, legally we don’t have any obligation to change the status quo.

n.b.
When reading articles on this blog please pay attention to the publication date of an article. Any article published prior to 2024 does not apply to the new Narkhan (fictional) location.