“I have carefully reviewed the independent fact-finding review conducted by the law firm of Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP, along with a response submitted to me by Mr. Dattani,” Virani said in an Aug. 12, 2024 statement. “The findings speak for themselves.”
Virani said he accepted Dattani's decision to “step down” as chief commissioner after he received Dattani’s Aug. 1, 2024, submissions responding to the law firm’s report. Maintaining the confidence of “all Canadians” in the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) “remains my top priority,” the justice minister said.
Federal Justice Minister and Attorney General Arif Virani
Dattani was supposed to start his new job on Aug. 8, 2024, but held off while Virani reviewed the July 29, 2024, 48-page report of the Toronto management-side labour and employment law boutique — which bills itself as “the employers’ lawyers.”
The Liberal government hired the law firm to look into allegations that Dattani’s background and history had not been properly vetted and that his previous public comments and actions showed he was unsuitable to lead the federal human rights watchdog. The CHRC has a broad mandate of promoting and protecting human rights in Canada.
Filion lawyers Sarah Crossley and Laura Freitag — who were hired July 12, 2024, as “legal agents” of the attorney general to “conduct a fact-finding exercise” and to report their findings back to Virani — concluded, among other things, that, in Dattani’s interview with them and in his submissions, “he deliberately de-emphasized the manner in which his academic work was critical of the State of Israel in respect of its treatment of Palestinians.”
“To be clear, it is our view that his involvement in advocacy and criticism does not necessarily result in the inference that Mr. Dattani could not perform the role of Chief Commissioner,” the lawyers said. “In some ways, Mr. Dattani’s scholarship and depth of knowledge of the Israel-Palestine [conflict] could have been framed as an asset to the role of chief commissioner. However, Mr. Dattani’s efforts to downplay the critical nature of his work was concerning and, certainly, his failure to directly disclose this work deprived the government of the opportunity to have a discussion with Mr. Dattani about what, if any, impact his scholarship and perspective would or could have if he were appointed to the role of Chief Commissioner.”
The lawyers said, however, that based on Dattani’s evidence and the scholarship that was reviewed and provided, “we cannot find that Mr. Dattani harboured or harbours any beliefs that would be characterized as antisemitic or that he has demonstrated any biases (conscious or unconscious) towards Jews or Israelis. While some may take issue with Mr. Dattani’s scholarship that we have been provided, the sources he relies upon in that scholarship, and his criticism of the State of Israel, he has not demonstrated any intentions or actions that suggest he is antisemitic or has beliefs that could be characterized as antisemitic.”
In response to the lawyers’ questions to him about his knowledge of, and views on, antisemitism and whether he has any conscious or unconscious biases towards Jewish people or Israelis, Dattani “was able to articulate a nuanced, well-considered definition of antisemitism,” the law firm’s report states.
“He was familiar with a variety of definitions proposed and used in the human rights literature. He advised that he had attended training on combatting antisemitism. Mr. Dattani was also keenly aware of the impact that antisemitism may have on Jewish and Israeli people. Mr. Dattani stated that in respect of antisemitism: ‘It is at historic highs in this country and elsewhere. That is of concern to me personally and professionally. In my job, in the domestic human rights world, I have taken it upon myself to hear from Jewish Israelis and to understand how intergenerational trauma operates. I would do what I could to understand things from their perspective.’ Unprompted, Mr. Dattani unequivocally stated his belief during the course of our interview that Israelis have a right to nationhood in the State of Israel. He also commented that Israelis are immensely diverse in their politics, like any group of individuals.”
The report said in his comments on antisemitism, Dattani “demonstrated a high degree of self-awareness and sensitivity to the current challenges faced by the Jewish community in Canada, as well as a commitment to continue to learn about those challenges in the future.”
With respect to the application process, interview, and information provided by Dattani, the law firm report concludes that “Dattani did not disclose the name ‘Mujahid Dattani’ on the Background Check and Consent Form or at any time during the application or interview process.”
Having considered the totality of the information provided, “we find Mr. Dattani’s explanation as to why ‘Mujahid Dattani’ was not listed under ‘[a]ll other names used’ lacks credibility,” the law firm said. “Dattani has used ‘Mujahid Dattani’ for many speaking engagements and on Twitter … for those reasons, by definition, ‘Mujahid Dattani’ is either a pseudonym and/or nickname.”
Moreover, Dattani “had a demonstrated past practice of selecting different names at different times and for different matters (whether academic or otherwise) depending on the audience or the forum,” the report states. “On a balance of probabilities and based on the totality of evidence, we find that Mr. Dattani intentionally omitted the reference to ‘Mujahid Dattani’ on the Background Check Consent Form (and elsewhere) and at no time in the application or interview process disclosed that, in the past, he had used the name ‘Mujahid Dattani.’”
“We do not find his explanation provided following our interview and as set out in the supplementary materials that there was a comma missing between “Birju” and “Mujahid” to be credible,” the law firm said.
For his part, Dattani said on LinkedIn that he had agreed to resign. “I remain a steadfast believer in the commission’s work, mandate, and its importance to our democracy,” he wrote. He posted his 15-page Aug. 1 submission to Virani, which challenges key “inaccuracies” he perceives in the fact-finders’ report by setting out detailed explanations and comments.
“The investigator failed to assess and evaluate my credibility, and instead, arrived at bald conclusions without sufficient reasons,” Dattani wrote. “There was no intent (and no evidence of intent) to hide the name Mujahid or the name Birju at any event where I spoke or presented,” he concluded.
“I feel that I could not have been more candid and transparent during the process that lead [sic] to my appointment as described herein,” he said. “I appreciate in your correspondence you have advised me that you have ‘significant concerns’ related to my ‘candour’ during the process that lead [sic] to my appointment. As such, I would welcome a discussion to better understand what those concerns are in relation to my candour. Specifically, I would ask that no definitive decision be made in relation to my appointment as Chief Commissioner of the Human Rights Commission until I have had the opportunity to discuss what your significant concerns are. Although I have done my best to respond in this correspondence, I wish to highlight that I do so without a full understanding of those concerns, and of course, it is my right to have that opportunity.”
Controversy around the appointment last June arose following media reports. Several leading Jewish organizations cited his alleged connection with individuals “linked to terrorist groups and radical organizations” and a history of making “antisemitic and un-Canadian” remarks in online posts and in public appearances. B’Nai Brith also deplored what it said was “yet another troubling example of the shortcomings of our federal government’s vetting process.”
The Bloc Quebecois and Conservatives also criticized the appointment and the vetting process leading to the hiring, with the official opposition contending that as “antisemitism continues to rise since the brutal October 7th attacks, this appointment is yet another slap in the face to Canada’s Jewish community from the Trudeau government.”
After Virani’s announcement, B’Nai Brith Canada called Dattani’s departure “a major relief for the Jewish community.”
“Considering his track record, serious questions were raised about his ability to perform the functions of chief commissioner of the CHRC in an objective and unbiased manner,” the Jewish advocacy group said in an Aug. 12 statement. “The Dattani saga highlights critical flaws in the government’s process for vetting candidates. We call for a thorough investigation to ensure such oversights are prevented in the future.”
When Dattani’s appointment was announced on June 14, 2024, the government described him as having “dedicated his career to protecting and upholding the rights of Canadians. He brings extensive practical and academic experience to the role of chief commissioner, having established himself as an expert in human rights law and as a champion for equity, diversity and inclusion.”
Dattani “brings a wealth of both professional and personal lived experience to this role,” Virani said at the time. “Our government remains committed to the protection of all human rights in Canada, including the fight against racism, and to strengthening our country’s role within the international human rights system.”
If you have any information, story ideas or news tips for Law360 Canada, please contact Cristin Schmitz at Cristin.schmitz@lexisnexis.ca or call 613-820-2794.