Ottawa residents and advocates across Ontario are raising alarms about a troubling pattern at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario: settlements that silence survivors through non-disclosure agreements, keeping the details of institutional failures locked away from the public eye.
The issue came into sharp focus recently through the case of Jeanie McKay, who alleged gender discrimination by York Regional Police. McKay said officers failed to investigate her allegations of historical sexual abuse that occurred in the 1980s — a complaint she brought before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario after years of seeking answers. Her case was ultimately settled, but the resolution came attached to an NDA, preventing her from speaking publicly about the outcome.
What NDAs Mean for Survivors
For survivors like McKay, non-disclosure agreements can feel like a second silencing. After years of pushing institutions to take their allegations seriously, an NDA-bound settlement means they cannot warn others, cannot speak to the press, and cannot share what they learned through the process.
Transparency advocates argue this is precisely why NDAs are problematic in cases involving public institutions. When a police service, school board, or government body settles a human rights complaint under seal, the institution faces no public reckoning — no policy change is mandated, no public acknowledgment is required, and no one outside the settlement knows the complaint was ever resolved.
"These agreements shield institutions from the accountability that comes with public knowledge," critics say. The concern is particularly acute when the institution in question is a publicly funded body entrusted with public safety, like a police service.
A Province-Wide Pattern
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario handles thousands of complaints each year from across the province, including Ottawa. While the tribunal plays a vital role in addressing discrimination in housing, employment, and services, the use of NDAs in settlements has drawn increasing scrutiny from legal experts and survivors' rights organizations.
Ontario does not currently have a blanket ban on NDAs in human rights settlements involving public bodies, though some other provinces and jurisdictions have moved in that direction following public pressure. Advocates argue that at minimum, settlements involving publicly funded institutions should require some form of public disclosure — even if individual identifying details are protected.
The Broader Conversation
McKay's case has reignited debate about how the tribunal balances confidentiality with transparency. Proponents of NDAs in settlements argue they give complainants a faster path to resolution and financial compensation, without the uncertainty and emotional toll of a full hearing. But for many survivors, especially those alleging failures by law enforcement, the public interest in knowing what happened may outweigh the expediency of a sealed deal.
As Ontario and its cities, including Ottawa, continue to grapple with questions of police accountability and institutional trust, the conversation around human rights tribunal NDAs is unlikely to quiet down. Advocates are calling on the provincial government to review the practice and consider legislative guardrails that would prevent public institutions from burying complaints behind confidentiality clauses.
For survivors navigating the tribunal process, legal organizations such as the Human Rights Legal Support Centre offer free assistance across Ontario.
Source: CBC Ottawa. Original reporting by CBC News.
