# data[].attributes.body
In Canada, we have two official languages, and you have the right to receive government services in either French or English. A citizen filed a report due to the federal government not properly exercising this right with this app and won.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The federal government has admitted that it forced Canadians to use the ArriveCAN application even though it knew there were problems picking what language you wanted to use - French or English - on iPhones, Radio-Canada has learned.

In a report obtained by Radio-Canada that has yet to be made public, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages said Ottawa undermined the language rights of Canadians.

The case is now being heard in Federal Court, where the government will have to explain its management of the application. Launched in April 2020, ArriveCAN was used to record proof of vaccination against COVID-19 for all travellers wishing to enter or return to Canada.

The complainant in this case, Darius Bossé, claimed Ottawa should not have mandated the use of the application knowing the problems associated with the display language. He wanted to return to Canada from the United States in the summer of 2021 and used an English version of the application that did not allow him to switch to French.

"When I am required to make personal statements about my health and location, it is absolutely essential to me that communication with the Canadian government takes place in the official language of my choice," Bossé said.

Unilingual application

The application's language issues began as early as its launch in 2020, according to documents filed by Ottawa in Federal Court.

At that time, the iPhone version allowed travellers to choose a display language, but that feature was "defective" because it did not consistently respect the user's chosen language, according to a federal government affidavit.

In addition, language preference was not always taken into account by screen readers, which are essential for users with special needs.

The government admitted to the court that it decided to "remove the language feature" in December 2020.

Users were then forced to use a version of the app based on their cell phone's operating language, with no clear guidelines for changing it as needed.

It wasn't until August 2021 - after Bossé's complaint - that the government offered more precise explanations to users who wanted to communicate with Ottawa in the official language of their choice.

And it wasn't until November 2021 that the government released an application for iPhones that allowed users to switch languages after downloading, according to the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.

The federal government filed the English version of its affidavits with the Federal Court on Sept. 26. The French versions were filed on Dec. 1.

Frustrated user

While travelling in the United States in 2021, Bossé tried to obtain the French version of the ArriveCAN application without success.

Having access only to the English version of the application on his cell phone, he tried to indicate on his user profile that French was his preferred language for communicating with the federal government.

Despite this, he had to continue using the English version of the application during his 14-day mandatory quarantine period. According to him, the choice of language for the operation of a cellphone is "personal" and should not affect his language rights.

After filing a complaint, Bossé won his case before the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages in the spring of 2022.

In its report, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages noted that the Public Health Agency of Canada "was aware" of the difficulties in operating the application in the user's language of choice on iPhones.

The report adds that the agency "did not inform the public [...] either of this fact or how to proceed to access the app in their preferred official language."

In June 2022, Bossé turned to Federal Court to try to prove that the agency had violated his language rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Official Languages Act. He is seeking damages of $22,500.

"The Constitution states that people have the right to be served by the federal government in the official language of their choice. For me, it is important that the Federal Court formally recognize this," he explains.

In an affidavit filed in Federal Court last September, the head of the ArriveCAN app, Chulaka Ailapperuma, confirmed that he faced numerous technical challenges related to the display language on Apple platforms in 2020 and 2021.

Possible solution

An expert hired by Bossé responded in a separate affidavit that the government should have been able to allow ArriveCAN users to change the language of the display within the application itself.

Gregory Cerallo, founder of Sidekick Interactive Inc. points to examples of bilingual applications created by Environment Canada, the SAQ or Hydro-Québec, all of which offer this feature.

"In my experience, inserting or maintaining a custom language feature in a mobile application poses an additional, but not insurmountable, challenge," Cerallo says.

He calculates that developing this feature would have cost an extra $72,000.

In all, Cerallo estimates that developing an application like ArriveCAN should not have cost more than $2 million.

Instead, the federal government spent tens of millions in connection with the creation and implementation of the application.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ottawa undermined Canadians' language rights with ArriveCAN app, language commissioner says | CBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The federal government has admitted that it forced Canadians to use the ArriveCAN application even though it knew there were problems picking what language you wanted to use - French or English - on iPhones, Radio-Canada has learned.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture shows the freedom of all citizens to vote for whomever they want without being forced.

# data[].attributes.body
These people decided to move out of their home province.
#thisplacesucks

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Sexual Orientation Inclusion In Equality Rights

# data[].attributes.body
Two gay men protested that section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms should include the rights/freedoms of all sexual orientations. The Supreme Court of Canada agreed upon this and officially stated that all sexual orientations must be protected under the charter.

# data[].attributes.body
This shows fundamental rights because they are allowed to have protests as long as they are peaceful and are not harmful.

# data[].attributes.body
This shows we have a right against unlawful search and seizure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An Ontario court rules forcing students to undergo breathalyzer tests before prom is unconstitutional.

# data[].attributes.body
We all have the right to celebrate our own beliefs. These many Sikh men and women go out yearly to celebrate their religion through parades! #celebrate

# data[].attributes.body
This person is voting with his Timbits. People should vote with their timbits. People have the right to vote! #VotewithyourTimbits

# data[].attributes.body
People are unable to work in certain roles and are judged on ability to work in that role based on their age. This prohibits people from some jobs. One example of this is posting a age range for a job. #ineedwork

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This summary of age discrimination in Canada has been prepared by Mathews Dinsdale, the Ius Laboris member for Canada:Mathews Dinsdale & Clark LLP

Overview

In every province and territory in Canada, human rights legislation prohibits discrimination in the employment context based on various protected grounds, including age. Separate legislation prohibits age discrimination for federally regulated employers. While each jurisdiction has different processes, exemptions, and remedies that apply to age discrimination, each piece of human rights legislation aims to protect employees from discrimination based on age..

Who's covered?

While no jurisdiction places a maximum age threshold on age discrimination protections, there are minimum age thresholds.

In British Columbia, age discrimination protections trigger if the applicant or employee is 19 years of age or older. Alberta,Saskatchewan,and Ontario protections will trigger if the employee or applicant is 18 years of age or older.

In Manitobaand New Brunswick, the minimum age threshold is the age of majority, which is 18 and 19 years of age, respectfully.

Other Canadian jurisdictions do not define age.

eSTABLISHING AGE DISCRIMINATION

When assessing whether age-based distinctions amount to unlawful discrimination, the applicant or employee must establish that they have:

· a characteristic protected from discrimination, which in this case would be age;

· experienced an adverse impact or treatment; and

· the employee's age was a factor in the adverse impact.

The employer can defend themselves by demonstrating that:

· the employee did not experience any adverse treatment;

· the adverse treatment was not influenced in any way by the employee's age (e.g. the employee's discipline or termination was wholly related to the employee's performance);

· the adverse treatment falls within an exemption in the applicable human rights statute; or

· the adverse treatment was based upon a bona fide occupational requirement (" BFOR ").

remedies

If an employer is found to have discriminated against an employee based on age and none of the defences noted above apply, an employer may attract damages for injury to the employee's dignity, feelings, and self-respect, also known as general damages, as well as being required to pay for lost wages and benefits. Non-monetary remedies may include reinstatement, a promotion, letters of assurance for future compliance, and/or a letter of reference, amongst others.

sTATUTORY EXEMPTIONS

Statutory exemptions to age discrimination differ depending on the jurisdiction, however, the most common include:

·a BFOR, meaning the workplace rule or standard that was applied to the employee, with an adverse result, is reasonably necessary for the performance of the job;

minimum age employment limits set by other legislation (such as minimum standards legislation, health and safety legislation, liquor control legislation, etc.);

exemptions found in other legislation;

·bona fide retirement plans or pension plans; and

· bona fide group insurance plans.

BFORS

Employers may be permitted to implement certain policies or practices that negatively or disproportionately impact older employees, as long as they can demonstrate that the policy or practice is based on a BFOR. For example, an employer may require a certain level of physical fitness for an employee engaged in manual labour.

For a BFOR to be valid, the employer must clearly demonstrate that the standard was:

·adopted for a purpose rationally connected to the performance of the job;

·adopted in an honest and good faith belief that it was necessary to fulfill the legitimate work-related purpose; and

·reasonably necessary to accomplish the legitimate work-related purpose.

Additionally, employers have a duty to accommodate employees to the point of undue hardship, which means they must make reasonable efforts to accommodate an employee's needs related to age. This may include, but is not limited to: flexible work arrangements, frequent breaks, adjusting the work place, and/or training.

hiring

Age discrimination may arise as early as the recruitment process.

Generally, employers should not:

·post job advertisements that directly or indirectly indicate age as a qualification; or

·ask questions during the recruitment process about an employee's age (e.g., birth date, photo ID, etc.).

Employers should be aware that over-qualification and age discrimination may be tied together, but they are not the same thing. Evidence that an employer refused to hire someone because they are overqualified is not the same as evidence of refusing to hire someone because they are too old.

Similarly, not offering employment to the most experienced candidate does not necessarily mean age discrimination has occurred. There may also be genuine non-discriminatory reasons for not hiring the candidate.

JOB PERFORMANCE

Subjecting an employee to a performance improvement plan and, if necessary, terminating their employment due to poor performance, does not constitute age discrimination as long as performance issues are assessed using objective non-discriminatory standards. However, if the standards used are arbitrary or clearly unattainable, or deviate from standard practices, it may suggest that age was a factor in the treatment of the employee.

It is important to be aware that failure to address performance deficiencies because of an expectation that the employee will soon retire may also form the basis of an age discrimination claim.

In Ouellette v IBM Canada Limited, 2017 HRTO 391, an employee claimed his employment was terminated in part based on his age. The employee was dismissed shortly after the employer hired a younger employee in a similar position to that occupied by the employee alleging age discrimination. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (" HRTO ") found that the older employee failed to establish a link between his age and the termination of his employment. Instead, the HRTO determined that the employee was dismissed due to performance issues. The temporal connection between the younger employee's hiring and the older employee's dismissal was not enough to establish discrimination and the employer provided credible evidence that there were issues with the older employee's performance.

PENSIONS PLANS

While specific language pertaining to exemptions varies between jurisdictions, human rights legislation in all Canadian jurisdictions except the Yukon, Manitoba, Nunavut, Ontario, and Quebec expressly exempt bona fide pension plans from age-based discrimination claims.

In jurisdictions where there is no specific exemption for a bona fide pension plan, another statutory exemption standard is typically applied. Most commonly, these jurisdictions will have one of the following exemptions:

· There is a reasonableness standard for the discrimination; or

· Discrimination on the basis of age in pension plans is permissible under other legislation.

The statutory exemption for a bona fide pension plan was used as a successful defence in Kynoch v Board of Education of School District No. 58 (Nicola-Similkameen). In the decision, the age of pension eligibility under the municipal pension plan (65 years old) was used as a basis to restrict payout of accumulated sick leave for an employee who retired/resigned at the age of 50. Only employees within 10 years of pension eligibility (e.g., 55 years old or older) were eligible for accumulated sick leave payout.

group insurance benefits

Alberta, British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Nunavut, Prince Edward Island, and Saskatchewan have statutory exemptions from age discrimination claims for the operation of bona fide employee or group insurance plans. In other jurisdictions, different statutory exemptions relating to employee or group insurance plans apply. For example, in Ontario, an exemption applies if the group insurance plan complies with the Employment Standards Act, 2000 and its regulations.

mandatory vs. voluntary retirement

Mandatory retirement is prohibited by human rights legislation unless it is required under separate legislation, is a component of a bona fide pension plan, or it is a BFOR.

Employers may implement a retirement policy that is tied to a specific age, provided retirement is, and remains, a voluntary choice, and the policy complies with the statutory exemption for retirement plans, such as a minimum age requirement in a voluntary early retirement program.

Merely reaching the retirement-eligible age does not grant the employer the right to encourage or coerce an employee into retirement, nor can they compel the employee to disclose their retirement plans.

However, it is not necessarily discriminatory to treat the employee differently once an employee has announced a retirement date. For example, it is reasonable and appropriate for the employer to:

consider the intended retirement in its workplace planning; and

decline access to training that may produce limited advantages, given the employee's impending retirement.

However, this should be reviewed cautiously.

TAKEAWAYS AND CONCLUDING REMARKs

Although employers have the right to oversee and manage their workforce, including making decisions regarding hiring, monitoring performance, and establishing performance standards, training and development, and downsizing its workforce, they may face allegations of discrimination if their decisions are based, in whole or in part, on the applicant's or employee's age.

Please be reminded that rules and regulations differ across jurisdictions. Most importantly, depending upon the jurisdiction, certain exemptions and restrictions may or may not be permitted. We encourage employers to review their existing practices, policies, and procedures to ensure they align with their applicable legislation, and if you have any questions regarding this topic or any other questions relating to workplace law, please do not hesitate to contact a Mathews Dinsdale lawyer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This summary of age discrimination law in Canada has been prepared by Mathews Dinsdale, the Ius Laboris member for Canada: www.mathewsdinsdale.com

# data[].attributes.body
THIS FAM HAS THE RIGHT TO MOVE WITHIN CANADA. THEY ARE BOXING THEIR STUFF UP AND PUTTING IT IN A VAN.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a fundamental right because they are allowed to protest as long as its peaceful and as long as it doesn't violate anyone else's rights.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'We won't accept': Hundreds spend weekend protesting new UCP policies aimed at trans youth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Hundreds of protesters gathered over the weekend in Edmonton to speak out against proposed legislation that would limit access to medical treatments for trans youth.

# data[].attributes.body
These two people have recently moved into Alberta from Ontario! They are using their mobility rights. It connects to their rights to move anywhere within Canada. They can either stay, enter, or leave as they please and these people are an example of the use of their rights.

# data[].attributes.body
this picture shows that every Canadian citizen is able to move to any province and able to live and earn a income, no matter where they move.

# data[].attributes.body
Protesters gathered in downtown Montreal to protest the Quebec government's Bill 21. proposed legislation that would ban some employees from wearing symbols of their faith.

# data[].attributes.body
This is under equality rights because it shows how the women are protesting for the same rights as Men.

# data[].attributes.body
All of us have the right to move, they could move to anywhere they want if they need to have a visa. They could come in to canada and leave it to if they want.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture is showing a guy rejecting some people's religions and not accepting their freedom of religions.

# data[].attributes.body
This shows fundamental freedom rights because Canadians have the freedom to organize peaceful meetings and demonstrations. Everyone has the freedom to express their own opinions and as shown in the picture, citizens are expressing their opinion about wanting to stope Asian hate peacefully and in a non harmful way.

# data[].attributes.body
This family has been living in BC and has travelled great lengths to arrive at Edmonton, where they now happily live. We all have the right to move wherever we want in Canada. #LiveWhereIWant

# data[].attributes.body
This protest shows fundamental rights because this is an organized event/ protest, using peaceful ways to stand up for what they think is right. In the photo we can see that many people are protesting for women, they all have the freedom to stand up for what they want and express their opinions. A group of people with the same opinion are coming together. They organized a peaceful demonstration/ meeting.

# data[].attributes.body
The woman was on a peaceful stroll to get to her destination. A cop charged at her for discriminatory reasons, ambulance arrived and she is severely injured. #NotCool

# data[].attributes.body
this is under equality rights to show that everyone is equal we are all human #weareeallJustPeople

# data[].attributes.body
This family is moving right now, but they are moving somewhere within canada, it is called mobility right. We have the right to live where ever we want in canada.

# data[].attributes.body
This family is moving out of their home in Edmonton and moving to Toronto showing that they have the right to move anywhere.

# data[].attributes.body
Houses were not searched during COVID as police did not have a warent. SO some people got away with partys.

#Partyallday

# data[].attributes.body
French citizen yelling at English worker because the Airport failed to have an active French speaking worker. The Language Rights states that people are to recieve government services in both English and French.

# data[].attributes.body
People are protesting to have the freedom to express how the feel about a topic. Woman should be able to choose what they want to do with their bodies. By protesting they are showing their opinions, also having a association to express their feelings.

# data[].attributes.body
This protest shows fundamental rights these people have to rights to organize an event/protest that is peaceful. They have the right to express their opinion and have their voices heard. By protesting they are expressing how they feel about a certain topic.

# data[].attributes.body
Kids have a right in Canada to learn two languages, English and French. This is regardless of where they live in Canada. As well you are not required to know both, you are able to go to any gov't run facility, and speak either one!

# data[].attributes.body
Your freedom of expressing religion is a fundemental freedom because, you need top be able to express your belifs and religion in order to feel free. If you cannot express your religion, then you are not free.

#reliegion

# data[].attributes.body
Every citizen in Canda has the right to recieve public service in French and English. The government is responsible for providing this service. If you buy something and you can only speak French, you should be able to speak French and get helped.

# data[].attributes.body
The three religious groups which urged the Board of Education last week to alter its policy and allow religious tivities in the public schools will have to wait a few more weeks for a decisión

# data[].attributes.body
PEOPLE CAN VOTE ON THIS DAY. WE HAVE THE RIGHTTTTTTTTT

# data[].attributes.body
This picture shows people voting for whoever they want showing we have voting rights.

#myvote

# data[].attributes.body
This religious protest shows fundamnetal rights because, they have the right to speak their own opinion. Others can not control their emotion, wether we like it or not.

# data[].attributes.body
This shows vote

# data[].attributes.body
this image shows that all humans are equal even if people have different types of disabilities.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture shows equality between genders, men and woman shouldnt be treated any differently for example its easier for men to get certain jobs because they are considered stronger and people think woman should just stay at home and cook. #womancanbestrong

# data[].attributes.body
This shows equality rights because it shows people on a balance scale all of them being different but equal

#equality #AMERICAAAAAAa

# data[].attributes.body
People think racism is gone but no. They are very wrong. Racism still exists and its still everywhere. We should support black people more and give them attention and stop racism.

# data[].attributes.body
)This teenage girl was on the phone with her partner when she was mistaken for a domestic violence suspect by a police officer and was wrongly tackled to the ground. #protectthestreets

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An Edmonton girl fought for her life, fearing she was being abducted to be trafficked - but it turns out her would-be captors were Edmonton Police Service officers who mistook her for the suspect in a nearby domestic violence call.

Haylie Nahamko-White had just gotten off work on Monday, Nov. 13. She was walking towards Londonderry Mall in north Edmonton, and about to cross 137th Avenue at 68th Street to meet her boyfriend.

It was 10:30 p.m., pitch dark outside. She was on the phone with her partner, who was parked across the street.

"I had an unmarked SUV pull up to me and they said they were police. I didn't see any logos or nothing. They didn't turn on their lights at all," Nahamko-White said Thursday.

The 17-year-old said a man in the vehicle told her if she fled, he would deploy his taser on her. She panicked and ran.

Story continues below advertisement

"I didn't think they were real cops. I thought they were lying," the teenager said through tears.

One of the officers tackled her on the street, where her face scraped against the pavement and left her with road rash still visible days later on her lips and chin.

The 17-year-old thought she was fighting for her life.

"He put me in handcuffs and I remember kicking with my feet. That's when they put my feet down, too. I just kept howling and screaming and that's when they told me, 'Be calm.'"

Nahamko-White said she thrashed and screamed, repeatedly saying "Please don't traffic me! I'm a good person!" as she tried to escape. Meanwhile, she said her boyfriend rushed to her aid.

Story continues below advertisement

"He parked in the middle of the road over there and he ran. He ran and was screaming, 'Get off of her.'"

In a statement, the Edmonton Police Service told Global News the officers were in an unmarked vehicle, responding to a domestic disturbance nearby in which a woman was refusing to leave a house.

"While enroute to the call, two officers noticed a female matching the description of the woman in the disturbance in the area of 137 Avenue and 67 Street. Uniformed officers approached the female in their unmarked police vehicle and advised her they wished to speak with her. The female began to step away, and when one of the officers exited the vehicle and asked her not to run, she fled into the open roadway," a statement from EPS communications said.

"At this time, officers believed she was the female suspect and one officer pursued her on foot. The other officer positioned the police vehicle to prevent other traffic from striking them. The female, who was resisting, was walked back to the curb where an officer took her into custody to prevent her from fleeing,'" the statement continued.

In the back of the police SUV, Hailey said she found out the men were actually police officers and she wasn't their suspect after all. Her boyfriend confirmed her identity and she was released.

A police supervisor was called to the scene and talked to her.

Story continues below advertisement

"He said, 'I'm so sorry Haylie, we were looking for some very bad people that matched your description,'" Nahamko-White said.

EPS said the officers were in uniform. Hailey said after the ordeal, the officer who chased her turned his toque around, and she could see the EPS logo. But in the dark, and in her panic, Nahamko-White said she didn't see it at first.

Charlene Nahamko, Haylie's mom, arrived on scene while Haylie was still in the back of the police SUV.

"She was totally distraught, she wouldn't even open her eyes to look at me. I was like, 'Mom's here, you're OK,'" Nahamko said.

She had choice words for the officers when she arrived, fearing the worst.

"I wasn't nice - I totally own that," Nahamko.

The supervisor offered to call an ambulance, but Nahamko said she'd handle it. EPS confirmed that medical aid was offered and declined. Nahamko said she took her daughter to the Manning Community Health Centre and called 911, wanting an officer to come take a statement.

"It's unforgivable. There's no excuse for that. None whatsoever," Nahamko said.

She said her daughter is five-feet-two-inches tall and 120 pounds, while the officer who chased her was much larger. "I couldn't comprehend it."

Story continues below advertisement

The teen was released into her mom's custody. Nahamko-White said she can forgive what happened, but forgetting what police did to her is more difficult.

"I have such high respect for them, but now it's totally deteriorated. I can't... I can't look at a cop the same," Nahamko-White said.

The honour-roll student said she hasn't been able to sleep since the ordeal.

"All you see when you close your eyes is just a man getting out of the car and just running at you full-speed, right?" she said.

The teen hopes the officers get better training in communicating with people.

Edmonton criminal defence lawyer Tom Engel, whose practice regularly involves law enforcement issues and is an outspoken critic of poor police conduct, said sorry doesn't cut it.

Story continues below advertisement

"It should have been obvious to the police officer that she was resisting arrest because she was terrified, not because she was a suspect," Engel said.

Nahamko said she doesn't think all officers are bad but incidents like this reflect poorly on police.

"I taught my children to trust you - the uniform. I taught my children to go to them for help. So who do you go to?" Nahamko wondered.

Nahamko previously worked with law enforcement, as a victim services advocate with the RCMP in Slave Lake. The mother and daughter, along with and Engel, all agree the ordeal could have been avoided.

"There were no flashing lights, there was nothing really indicating they were police other than them saying they were the police and we all know people masquerade as police and they're not police - they're dangerous," Engel said.

Police Chief Dale McFee said the situation is being looked into but reminded citizens they do need to obey officers.

"When police ask you to stop more than one time, you know, it's really against the law to run. So I think we have to look at this and we obviously have to figure out if something did go wrong, what went wrong."

Story continues below advertisement

As is standard process, EPS said the officers involved immediately notified their supervisors of the circumstances of the arrest, one of whom attended the scene to conduct a review. The EPS Professional Standards Branch is now investigating.

Police said the woman from the initial domestic violence call was never arrested.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teenage girl tackled, injured by Edmonton police officer in case of mistaken identity | Globalnews.ca

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An Edmonton girl fought for her life, fearing she was being abducted -but it turns out her would-be captors were police officers who mistook her for a domestic violence suspect.

# data[].attributes.body
Everyone citizen has the freedom to express religion because it creates diversity and people get to express freedom!

# data[].attributes.body
This Picture is Fundamental Freedom because people protesting, we have the right to protest #Betterlife

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
#Palestine#SavePalestine. Community coming together to support Palestine

# data[].attributes.body
We indeed have the fundamental right to protest for a country going through deep pain. This picture demonstrates the people of Edmonton protesting for Palestine due to the conditions in Palestine. Many people are coming together for a great cause, which shows how much power a community really does have.

# data[].attributes.body
this guy was protesting about black lives matter and was arrested because he was black and was sentenced without any questions in a free country

#saveinnocentpeople

# data[].attributes.body
A box of cookies showing the product in English and French. This shows our language rights because this brand is offering the product in both French and English.

#bilingual

# data[].attributes.body
This image shows that people have the right to vote for who they choose.

#personalbeliefs 😤

# data[].attributes.body
This person is giving a big public speech. You have the freedom of speech. But don't conflict anyone else rights cause then you don't have the right. #SpeekyourMind

# data[].attributes.body
medicare negotiating the price of drugs that costs $7,100 in the USA vs. 900 in canada Because medication is so much cheaper in canada compared to other countries including america, Japan, UK, Germany and much much more. this is a legal right of security of person and life

#dontraiseprices

# data[].attributes.body
PRELIMINARY REMARKS The International Committee of the Red Cross has, from the outset, been the sponsor of the Geneva Convention for the protection of wounded military personnel, and of the humanitarian Conventions which supplement it. Each of these fundamental international agreements is inspired by respect for human personality and dignity; together, they establish the principle of disinterested aid to all victims of war without discrimination – to all those who, whether through wounds, capture or shipwreck, are no longer enemies but merely suffering and defenceless human beings. Throughout the years, the International Committee has laboured unremittingly for the greater protection in International Law of the individual against the hardships of war; it successively elaborated the humanitarian Conventions and adapted them to current needs, or instituted new ones. In the period between the two World Wars, the Committee’s main achievement lay in the establishment of a number of draft Conventions, chief among which was the Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War; this was signed in the summer of 1929 and, during the last conflict, protected millions of captives. Other new or revised draft Conventions were to have been submitted to a Diplomatic Conference which the Swiss Federal Council planned to convene early in1940; hostilities, unfortunately, intervened. The year 1945 marked the close of a war waged on an unprecedented scale; the task had to be faced of developing and adapting the humanitarian elements of International Law in the light of the experience gained. The International Committee’s proposals met with the early approval of Governments and National Red Cross Societies, and it immediately set to work. Three former Conventions had to be revised: the Geneva Convention of 1929 for the Relief of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field, the Xth Hague Convention of 1907 for the adaptation to Maritime Warfare of the Principles of the Geneva Convention, and the 1929 Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Furthermore, there was urgent need for a Convention for the protection of civilians, the absence of which had, during the world conflict, led to such grievous consequences. The International Committee worked on the lines it had followed after the 1914-1918 War. First, it collected the fullest possible preliminary information on those aspects of International Law that required confirmation, enlargement, or amendment; then, with the help of experts from various countries, it prepared the revised and new drafts which were submitted, first, to an International Red Cross Conference, and then to a Diplomatic Conference empowered to give these treaties final validity. The first meeting of experts was held in October 1945 and comprised the neutral members of the Mixed Medical Commissions which, during the conflict, had visited wounded or sick prisoners of war, to decide about their repatriation. The second meeting was the “Preliminary Conference of National Red Cross Societies for the study of the Conventions and of various problems relative to the Red Cross”, which the International Committee convened at Geneva, in July and August 1946, and before which the first drafts were laid. Having gathered the suggestions of Red Cross agencies on points which were within their particular fields, the Committee made a close study during the months that followed, and collected very full data on all matters dealt with in the proposed Conventions. Consultations included one, in March 1947, with representatives of the religious and secular bodies which had collaborated with the Committee in giving spiritual and intellectual aid to victims of the War. From April 14 to 26, 1947, the “Conference of Government Experts for the study of Conventions for the Protection of War Victims” was held in Geneva. This was attended by seventy representatives of fifteen Governments which had held large numbers of prisoners and civilian internees during the War, and were therefore particularly experienced in the matters under discussion. Combining the Committee’s proposals, the suggestions made by the Red Cross Societies, and drafts prepared by several Governments, the Conference agreed to the new texts proposed and to the first draft of a Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. The International Committee also sought the advice of several Governments which were not represented at the April Conference; some sent experts to Geneva in June 1947. The drafts in preparation were also submitted by the Committee to a Special Commission of National Red Cross Societies, which met at Geneva in September of the same year. After careful editing early in the year, the Draft Conventions were sent by the Committee, in May 1938, to all Governments and National Red Cross Societies, in preparation for the XVIIth International Red Cross Conference. This Conference sat in Stockholm from August 20 to 31, 1948; the representatives of fifty Governments and fifty-two National Red Cross Societies were present. With some amendments, the drafts were adopted. After passing through the many preparatory stages briefly described, these texts were eventually taken as the sole Working Documents of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva; out of these grew the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, convened by the Swiss Federal Council, as trustee of the Geneva Conventions, was held in Geneva from April 21 to August 12, 1949 Of the sixty-three Governments represented at the Conference, fifty-nine had sent plenipotentiaries; four sent observers only. Representatives of the International Committee were invited to participate in the capacity of experts. After four months of continuous debate, the Conference established the following four Conventions, which are given below: I. Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, of August 12, 1949. II. Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, of August 12, 1949. III. Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, of August 12, 1949. IV. Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of August 12, 1949. The Conference at once divided into four Committees; the First, for the revision of Conventions I and II; the Second, for the revision of Convention III (Prisoners of War); the Third, to establish the new Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons; and lastly, the Joint Committee, to deal with provisions common to the four Conventions. Co-ordination and Drafting Committees met towards the end of the Conference, to harmonize the four texts. When necessary, the Committees formed Working Parties. At the closing meeting, Delegations of the following States signed the Final Act: Afghanistan, Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Canada, Chile, China, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Greece, Guatemala, the Holy See, Hungary, India, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jugoslavia, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Luxemburg, Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Rumania, Siam, Soviet Socialist Republic of Bielorussia, Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine, Spain, Sweden, Syria, Turkey, Union of Soviet Socialist. Seventeen Delegations also signed the four Conventions; forty-four other States had signed when the agreed six-months period expired on February 12, 1950. According to their provisions, the new Geneva Conventions come into force six months after the deposit of at least two instruments of ratification. Thereafter, they come into force for each Contracting Party six months after it ratifies. PROVISIONS COMMON TO THE FOUR CONVENTIONS The Geneva Diplomatic Conference made an innovation in grouping together and amplifying the common provisions, up to then dispersed and rudimentary. Now practically identical in the four Conventions, they may be considered under three headings: General Provisions The General Provisions are given in a dozen Articles of great importance at the beginning of each Convention, laying down the mode of application. They deal with respect for the Conventions and their application in international conflict, enemy occupation or civil war. They are followed by provisions about the duration of application, special agreements which Contracting Parties may conclude, the inalienability of the right of protected persons, the duties of Protecting Powers or their substitutes, the activities of the International Committee of The Red Cross, and conciliation procedure between the Contracting Parties. Repression of Breaches of the Conventions (Articles 49 to 52 of the First Convention, 50 to 53 of the Second, 129 to 131 of the Third, and 146 to 149 of the Fourth). The Stockholm Conference had expressed the view that the provisions it had approved were still inadequate, and had requested the International Committee to continue its study of this important question. After consulting lawyers of international repute, the Committee prepared suggestions which appeared in the volume “Remarks and Proposals”, submitted for consideration. The Conference used these suggestions as a basis for its deliberations. The first of the Articles imposes penal sanctions for breaches of the Convention, in particular for “grave breaches”, as defined in the succeeding Article. #rights #geneva #support #help

# data[].attributes.body
I have the right to move and live wherever I want in Canada!

#Mobility Rights!

# data[].attributes.body
The Edmonton election shows a clear divide between urban Canadians and rural Canadians. People feel like it isn't fair and aren't satisfied with the results of the previous election.

#notfair :(

# data[].attributes.body
This shows equality because everyone is being represented the same way, and all should have the same opportunity as everyone else to live their lives the way they want to.

#equalityisthebest

#🦅GodsaveAmerica 🦅

# data[].attributes.body
This Picture Shows that we have the choice to vote and decide what is happening, we have the right to vote and help decide stuff for our community #OurChoice

# data[].attributes.body
This image shows protesters who are using their Fundamental Freedoms to express their opinion on the Israel and Palestine war.

#boycott

# data[].attributes.body
A new law titled "An act respecting French, the official and common language of Quebec." Making everything from education and health available in other languages for immigrants. We have a right for things to be in the official languages as a option.

#subtitles

# data[].attributes.body
This picture shows that the black people in Toronto are protesting about violence against black people, this shows that the police are not actually doing what they are supposed to do and just committing violence against innocent black people for no suspected reason. It is a fundamental right for black people to go outside and not fear about being brutalized by the police. #BlackLivesMatter

# data[].attributes.body
I have the right to be offered services in either one of the official languages of Canada!

#English

#French

# data[].attributes.body
People Have the right to be served in French and English. Les gens ont le droit d'être servis en français et en anglais. #ProtectTheFrench

# data[].attributes.body
WE HAVE A RIGHT TO MOVE BECAUSE WE ARE CITIZENS

#icanmoveanytime

# data[].attributes.body
Even to this day indigenous people are STILL being discriminated. It's true. Many indigenous people are being racially harassed by white people. It's quite ironic since we kicked them out of their land. Killed them. took away their identity with residential schools. and this is how we repay them. WE need to give the indigenous people back their identity and their rights. #stoprascismtowardsindigenous #rights #indigenous

# data[].attributes.body
this shows that no matter you're gender or skin color you have equal rights in Canada.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture is representing a family demonstrating their mobility rights by moving out of their home. Every individual has the right to move.

#MobilityRights

# data[].attributes.body
these people are moving and they have the right too. If you are living in Canada you have the right to move. #GETOUTAHERE

# data[].attributes.body
having the right to move anywhere no matter how you are

#freetomove