Fairy Tales: Filmmaker revisits Delwin Vriend case in new documentary
There is anger in Darrin Hagen's voice when he talks about the Delwin Vriend case in Alberta.
Article content
The landmark decision, which came down from the Supreme Court of Canada in 1998 and extended human-rights protections to queer Albertans, was certainly groundbreaking. Hagen calls it 'one of those dominoes' that led to change that impacted LGBTQ+ rights in Alberta, Canada and even the world. When the Alberta government was forced by the courts to treat queer people equally, it eventually lead to progress in other areas such as same-sex marriage and queer adoptions.
Article content
Article content
The story about how Vriend's case, which began after he was fired in 1991 from his job as a laboratory instructor at King's College for being gay, went all the way to the Supreme Court is inspiring, of course. But it is also infuriating, Hagen says. The hostility of the Alberta government, which continued to fight even after realizing it had no legal standing to do so, is a major part of the story and one that seems particularly timely today as ugly divisions re-emerge in the province and around the world regarding LGBTQ+ rights.
Article content
Article content
'The government kept paying (lawyers) to push this thing forward even though they knew that they would lose,' says Hagen. 'I think that is something we all need to recognize about the provincial government that we lived through. They used our money to fight our rights. I'm a taxpayer, right? It's my money, and they are using my money to fund a battle to withhold me from full participation in Alberta society. Every queer in Alberta should be (expletive) pissed off about that.'
'You can tell I'm not neutral about this,' he adds.
Article content
Hagen, an award-winning playwright, drag performer and queer historian, spent years studying the case as director of the documentary Pride vs. Prejudice: The Delwin Vriend Story. He was aware of the case as it was happening. Everybody in the community was, even if they were watching from afar. One of the biggest misconceptions of the case was that it pitted Vriend and his supporters against King's College. The college wasn't being sued; Alberta was. After being fired, Vriend attempted to file a discrimination complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission but was told sexual orientation was not protected under the Human Rights Code in Alberta. So the case was not against the college, but the Government of Alberta and its Human Rights Commission. The Alberta government lost. That would have been the end of it had the Alberta government not appealed, which is how the case went to the Supreme Court of Canada. The government had used queer rights and queer equality as a wedge issue, a 'divisive tool in their arsenal,' Hagen says. 'So this was about taking that tool away from them.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Calgary Herald
an hour ago
- Calgary Herald
Alberta's new access to information rules come into effect
Alberta's new access to information rules that the province characterizes as modernizing dated legislation but critics say permit more government secrecy came into force Wednesday following the approval of four orders – in – council. Article content The Access to Information Act was first introduced by Service Alberta Minister Dale Nally last November and was passed by the legislature and received royal assent the following month. Article content Article content Article content Wednesday's orders-in-council come six months later and proclaim the new legislation into force while also setting out new regulations for the act. Article content Article content 'Access to information plays a vital role in ensuring public confidence and trust in the integrity of government institutions,' reads a statement from Nally's office. Article content 'The regulations and policies that will support the Access to Information Act will help secure that trust by demonstrating the government's open and accessible approach to handling official records and enabling and encouraging government departments to proactively disclose more information to Albertans.' Article content The act replaces the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act by splitting it into two, with the new Protection of Privacy Act also coming into force on Wednesday. Article content Nally has cited the need to overhaul the prior legislation that hadn't been updated in two decades, including by creating a new central website, Transparency Alberta, that includes information about government decisions, spending, and activities, though not a database of completed information requests as seen in other Canadian governments. Article content Article content 'We expect that the number of records available through Transparency Alberta will grow,' Nally said. Article content The new rules have been criticized as further limiting what information can be disclosed. Article content They exempt communications between political staff and ministers as not disclosable, with the regulations defining political staff as 'an employee, other than an employee appointed under the Public Service Act, who holds a position in the Office of the Premier or an office of a member of the Executive Council (cabinet).' Article content The former timeline for the government to respond to an access to information request is also extended from 30 calendar days to 30 business days.
Edmonton Journal
an hour ago
- Edmonton Journal
Ted Morton: Yes or No separation question wrong way to hold referendum
Article content The First Ministers' conference in Saskatoon has come and gone. Premier Danielle Smith says she was 'encouraged' by Prime Minister Mark Carney's remarks. Maybe because Carney stated that there is 'real potential for an oil pipeline to tidewater.' But later, he qualified that it would have to be 'decarbonized oil.' What will that mean? We just don't know. What we do know is that if Quebec were treated like Alberta has been treated, it would have separated long ago. And if Albertans had the opportunity to renegotiate the terms of our relationship with Canada, we would never consent to the status quo.
Winnipeg Free Press
4 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Abrego Garcia's lawyers ask judge to fine Trump administration for contempt
Lawyers for Kilmar Abrego Garcia have asked a federal judge in Maryland to impose fines against the Trump administration for contempt, arguing that it flagrantly ignored court ordersfor several weeks to return him to the U.S. from El Salvador. Abrego Garcia's attorneys said the administration claimed to be powerless to retrieve him, even while it secretly built a human smuggling case against him. The U.S. brought Abrego Garcia to a federal court in Nashville, Tennessee last week to face those charges. 'The Government's defiance has not been subtle,' the attorneys said in a filing late Wednesday. 'It has been vocal and sustained and flagrant.' The attorneys also are asking U.S. District Court Judge Paula Xinis to compel the release of documents the federal government withheld by claiming they contain protected state secrets. Or as an alternative, the lawyers suggested a special master to investigate the government's 'willful noncompliance' of court orders. 'What the Government improperly seeks to hide must be exposed for all to see,' Abrego Garcia's attorneys wrote. Their request came a day after the Trump administration said it will ask Xinis to dismiss the case, with U.S. attorneys describing recent accusations by Abrego Garcia's attorneys as baseless, desperate and disappointing. 'But the proof is in the pudding — Defendants have returned Abrego Garcia to the United States just as they were ordered to do,' they wrote. Legal experts said last month that the Abrego Garcia case may be headed for contempt. And the request by his attorneys adds to the ongoing friction between the White House and the courts during President Donald Trump's second term. Courts can hold parties to civil litigation or criminal cases in contempt for disobeying their orders. The penalty can take the form of fines or other civil punishments, or even prosecution and jail time, if pursued criminally. But contempt processes are slow and deliberative, and, when the government's involved, there's usually a resolution before penalties kick in. The U.S. mistakenly deported Abrego Garcia to an El Salvador prison in March. The expulsion violated a U.S. immigration judge's order in 2019 that shielded him from deportation to his native country because he likely faced gang persecution there. Abrego Garcia's American wife sued, prompting Xinis to order his return on April 4. The Supreme Court ruled April 10 that the administration must work to bring him back. Arguments ensued over the next several weeks about whether the Trump administration was following those orders or not. Trump also said publicly that he could return Abrego Garcia to the U.S. with a call to El Salvador President Nayib Bukele. Xinis ordered U.S. attorneys to submit documents and testimony to show what the government had done to follow her orders. The Trump administration claimed that much of that information is protected under the state secrets privilege. The judge has not ruled on that matter.
