|
Racism - Systemic. Okafor v. Ontario College of Teachers
In Okafor v. Ontario College of Teachers (Ont Div Ct, 2025) the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed a teacher's appeal [under s.35(1) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act], here brought against "the decision of the Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers .... which found her guilty of professional misconduct ..." and from "the Discipline Committee’s penalty decision ... that ordered ... a five-month suspension, and costs in the amount of $60,000.00".
Here the court considers 'systemic racism', here in a professional penalty context:[91] The Appellant submits that in the criminal law context it has been recognized that systemic racism is a factor that should be considered on sentencing. The Appellant relies on R. v. Morris, 2021 ONCA 680, 159 O.R. (3d) 641, at para. 123, for the principle that a court should take notice of anti-Black racism in Canada when fashioning an appropriate sentence in a criminal proceeding. However, the Ontario Court of Appeal was less absolute than suggested by the Appellant as it stated at para. 123 that the “… discrimination suffered by Black offenders … may, in a given case, play a role in fixing the offender’s moral responsibility for the crime …to arrive at an appropriate sanction in the circumstances”.
[92] There is a principle of law that systemic racism and unconscious bias must be considered by the Discipline Committee, or other professional regulatory body, when determining a fit sentence for professional misconduct: Barnwell v. Law Society of Ontario, 2025 ONSC 1825 (Div. Ct.), at paras. 73-79. The Discipline Committee had already addressed at length the submissions that systemic racism played a role in the complaints against the Appellant and did not have to revisit these submissions at the penalty hearing. The Discipline Committee found that anti-Black racism did not play a role in this case, meaning it was not required to apply Morris to the penalty decision: Barnwell, at para. 79. The Discipline Committee did not err in law in imposing a five-month suspension.
|
