The federal government says the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal wrongfully awarded compensation to both complainants and witnesses who claimed discrimination by the RCMP in an investigation of historical sexual abuse allegations against a school teacher in Burns Lake, B.C.
The tribunal issued a decision last month directing the RCMP to review its policies, practices and training when dealing with “Indigenous crime complainants in historical abuse investigations.”
The decision stems from a 2017 complaint made by members of the Lake Babine First Nation for discriminatory conduct by police during an investigation of alleged abuse by a teacher and coach in the 1960s and 1970s.
The investigation was conducted between 2012 and 2014, and the complainants claimed it was a “discriminatory practice” under the Canadian Human Rights Act.
The act prohibits denying access to “goods, services, facilities or accommodation customarily available to the general public” or treating people “adversely” on prohibited grounds of discrimination, such as race or ethnic or national origin.
The complainants argued that a police criminal investigation is a “service” covered by the act.
The teacher’s name was ordered to be kept confidential by the tribunal, and three of four the complainants died before the complaint hearing.
The tribunal awarded $7,500 plus interest to the complainants or their estates, and also four witnesses who testified at the hearing.
The Attorney General of Canada says in a court application that the tribunal is not the “proper forum” for discrimination complaints against the RCMP, and that police investigations are not a “service” covered by the Canadian Human Rights Act.
The tribunal directed the RCMP to “review all of its policies, practices, procedures and training related to Indigenous crime complainants, witnesses and others connected to investigations of allegations of historical abuse involving Indigenous peoples to ensure service delivery that is trauma informed and culturally appropriate.”
It ordered the police force to report the outcome of that review to the Canadian Human Rights Commission within a year of the decision.
The federal government’s application says the decision should be “quashed in its entirety.”
The application says RCMP enforcement activities cannot be characterized as a service, and the tribunal “misinterpreted and misapplied” the legislation in a way that doesn’t align with Parliament’s intent for the law.
“The conduct of a criminal investigation engages core law enforcement functions,” the application says. “Core law enforcement functions such as decisions made by police in the course of a criminal investigation are not a ‘benefit’ extended to any individual member of the public but rather are in the general public interest.”
It says the tribunal’s decision also didn’t consider the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission, the review and oversight scheme established by Parliament with a broad mandate over complaints involving the RCMP.
“This includes complaints of discrimination,” the application says. ”The proper forum for discrimination complaints against the RCMP is the (Civilian Review and Complaints Commission) or the courts, not the commission or the tribunal.”
The complainants’ lawyers did not respond to a request for comment on the judicial review, and no legal response has been filed.
A lawyer for the Attorney General of Canada with the B.C. regional office of the Department of Justice declined to comment on the case on Tuesday.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 7, 2026
Darryl Greer, The Canadian Press
