********************************************************
WHAT IS GOING ON WITH MY ACADEMIC ORDEAL AT UBC?
********************************************************
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
EXPERIENCE AT UBC
Since 1998, I have been trying to collect
all my personal information generated by all the faculties and individuals
involved in my ordeal at UBC as my rights to access my personal information
have been and are under the control of the same office/persons entrusted with
the duty to protect the reputation of UBC at all cost, the office of Mr. Dennis
Pavlich. He was originally the Unversity Counsel, but now he is the
Vice-President Academic and external affairs I heard. He has been promoted for violating university
rules and regulations in my case all these years while seeking redress at UBC
and outside UBC.
LESSONS
LEARNED FROM MY EXPERIENCE:
a.
students
should expect not to be able to access their personal information when they
need it(eg. when complaints/appeals are being investigated)while at UBC even
though it is their right;
b.
student
should not expect to be copied all the documents used or to be used against
them when appealing or seeking redress while at UBC when they should even
though it is their right;
c.
minority
and/or international and/or out of the province students are not expected to be
around for long to collect their personal information when they are dismissed
because it takes months, and in my case years, to be able to access your
personal information when UBC is protecting its reputation and the reputation
of officials who failed you, and the cost of tuition, housing, food,
transportation, family and professional pain and so on falls on the victim that
most likely will not be working while UBC officials have their salaries coming
on time so they do not mind extending the ordeal of the student as much as they
can;
d.
students
like me who are abused are on their own, while all UBC officials and faculties
work on collusion, within faculties, between faculties, individuals and
faculties and legal departments and all of the above and redress bodies such as
the UBC Senate Committee on Academic Appeals;
e.
students
should expect all appeal and redress bodies to break their own laws when the
need to protect the reputation of UBC arises;
f.
under the
above conditions, immigrant students and international students and out of
province students are at a very high risk of being ignored or dismissed when
facing problems, especially if they involve inappropriate behavior, and as UBC
goes international and expands more, many more students may be at risk;
g.
under the
above conditions, students should expect their personal information to be
ignored or twisted or altered or changed or be inappropriately presented or
described formally and informally to fit the specific UBC needs at any level of
appeal/redress, internally and externally;
h.
under the
above conditions, students should expect information not known to exist
suddenly appearing and they should expect that information known to exist or
that should exist is actually nowhere to be found when needed;
i.
under the
above conditions, students should not expect, the president of the university,
Dr. Piper or the Board of Governors or the UBC Senate as a whole, to stand up
for justice and student and human rights and their general academic rights at
UBC, probably they will ignored you as they did to me;
j.
also
students should expect the BC Freedom of Information Commissioner to act
without much concern about timeliness when carrying formal inquires into the
student's complaints against UBC as in my case it has taken in some instances
many months just to provide a decision that in my opinion and according to the
evidence presented and/or the conflict of duty(student rights and the need to
protect UBC's reputation at all costs) existing in the UBC office dealing with
UBC Student's access requests was biased and/or unfair or unreasonable;
k.
it is
2006, and UBC has not yet given me full access to my personal information under
its control since 1998: UBC Lawyers have claimed that public evaluations of my
academic work used by UBC officials to deny me entry into faculties where to
formalize my completed PhD thesis outside Forestry were actually done privately
so I can not see them. And UBC lawyers claimed in 2001 in writing, contrary to
UBC conflict of interest laws and student perceptions about those laws, that
'CONFLICT OF INTEREST INFORMATION SUCH AS THE ANNUAL FACULTY REPORT ON
EXTRA-UNIVERSITY ACTIVITIES IS COLLECTED BY UBC ONLY TO PROTECT THE REPUTATION
OF UBC AND THAT OF THE FACULTY/BODIES DISCLOSING IT EVEN WHEN THEY VIOLATE
STUDENT RIGHTS AND UBC LAWS ISSUED TO PROTECT THOSE STUDENT RIGHTS. STUDENTS
LIKE ME SUBJECTED TO UNETHICAL CONDUCT/ INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR RELATED/THAT CAN
BE EXPLAINED OR CORROBORATED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY WITH CONFLICT OF INTEREST
INFORMATION HAVE NO RIGHT TO ACCESS THAT INFORMATION NEITHER WHILE APPEALING AT
UBC INTERNALLY NOR OUTSIDE UBC, AS MY CASE SHOWS, WHICH IS ANOTHER VIOLATION OF
STUDENT AND HUMAN RIGHTS RELATED TO THE STUDENT RIGHT TO BE PROVIDED COPY OF
ALL EVIDENCE USED AGAINST HIM/HER OR COPY OF ALL PERSONAL INFORMATION UNDER THE
CONTROL OF UBC/FULL ACCESS BEFORE FORMAL HEARINGS SUCH AS THE ONE AT THE UBC
SENATE LEVEL I HAD IN 1998.
l.
You can
see that those students who can not stay or afford to stay in BC for all the
time the BC Freedom of Information Commissioner takes for his complaint review
process and/or inquiries(the poor, the out of Vancouver/Province minority,
international students, and so on) would leave without their rights being
respected, which is a situation that favors UBC;
m. UBC should be expected to take the 60 days it has to
address the information request; then requesting a review of the UBC decision
to the BC Information Commissioner and the involvement of the portfolio officer
assigned to mediate leads to a process that may take months; then when an
Inquiry is called to resolved remaining issues related to the same decision
review, presenting submissions and deciding on those submissions lead to
another process that may take again months to have a decision.
THE FAILURE OF THE EXTERNAL
MONITORING PROCESS SO FAR
The UBC Senate had all the reasons,
consistent with their own academic appeal rules and with the evidence presented
to it, to grant me my Ph.D. degree in 1998 to formalize the Ph.D. thesis I completed
despite of being subjected to so much institutional and personal abuse in and
outside the faculty of forestry, yet it chose to dismiss my appeal instead
knowing that his was a very unjust and discriminatory decision. The UBC Senate
appeal committee simply dismissed my appeal because of who it knew I am, an
immigrant from
A) THE UNFAIR
BEHAVIOR AT THE BC OMBUDSMAN'S LEVEL
To dismiss my appeal, the UBC Senate had
to violate its own rules, and this is a fact that prompted the BC Ombudsman to
quickly take my case and to write to UBC's Lawyer Mr. Dennis Pavlich in October
1998 especifically telling him that. Hence, the BC Ombudsman took my case
quickly because all the evidence I presented showing the unfair and/or biased
treatment received from UBC officials and bodies, including the UBC Senate
substantiated/supported the need for intervention.
I provided evidence to the BC Ombudsman
showing that information and statements provided by UBC officials to it were
either misleading or incomplete or untrue. Also the the BC Ombudsman received
affidavits from independent academic experts local and internationally who
carefully read my completed Ph.D. thesis supporting what everybody knew that my
Ph.D. thesis was completed and merited the granting of the degree when
dismissed by the UBC Senate in 1998, but without telling me, the BC Ombudsman(through
Ms. Eileen Diersch) had promised in October 1998 to UBC in writing practically
that it was not going to recommend the granting of the degree if that was the
case:
And on March 2000, two years after taking
my case, the BC Ombudsman dismissed my complaint claiming it could not
substantiate it even though she never contacted the independent academic
experts who took the time to write to her: I REQUESTED AN INDEPENDENT
INVESTIGATION OF THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE 1998 UBC SENATE'S DECISION TO DISMISSED
MY APPEAL TO AVOID GRANTING ME MY Ph.D. DEGREE, AND THE BC OMBUDSMAN AGREED TO
CARRY OUT SUCH AN INVESTIGATION, YET NO INVESTIGATION WAS EVER CARRIED OUT IN
TWO YEARS AND THE COMPLAINT WAS SIMPLY DISMISSED. ALL THIS TIME, THE BC
OMBUDSMAN DID NOT ALLOW ME TO PRESENT A HUMAN RIGHT COMPLAINT AGAINST UBC WHILE
THEY WERE INVESTIGATING AS IF I DID I WAS TOLD EVEN BY THE BC OMBUDSMAN
HIMSELF(MR. HOWARD KUSHNER) MY CASE COULD BE AFFECTED.
In Summary, The BC Ombudsman failed
me/discriminated against me and wasted two years of my life simply to avoid
having to recommend to UBC to grant me my Ph.D. degree even though it knew and
I knew such a recommendation would not be binding on UBC;
B) UNFAIR
BEHAVIOR AT THE BC HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION'S LEVEL
When the BC Ombudsman failed me in March
2000, I moved to gathering all personal information under the BC Ombudsman's
control(1998-2000) and the remaining personal information still under UBC
control(1993-2000) through the BC Freedom of Information Commissioner so I
could file a human right complaint against each of these two public bodies at
this time: AS MY CONFLICT WITH UBC IS STILL AN ONGOING PROCESS, I WAS TOLD THAT
I COULD FILE A COMPLAINT WITH THE BC HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ANYTIME WITHIN A
YEAR AFTER THE BC OMBUDSMAN'S DISMISSAL.
In December 2000, less than a year of the
BC Ombudsman's discriminatory dismissal, I came with Mr. Eduardo Cruz, from
From December 2000 to April 2001, with the
help of Mr. Threlfall and with the help of legal advisors, I managed to write,
document, and present a formal complaint against UBC and a separate complaint
against the BC Ombudsman to Mr. Threlfall just as he had suggested me to do. So
Mr. Threlfall received my two complaints and detailed evidence supporting my
claims, prepared within a year after the BC Ombudsman's discriminatory
dismissal and prepared as he suggested so they could be served to those public
bodies soon after presented.
B1) The reassignment of my complaint against UBC to Ms. Martha Rans as informed by Mr. Peter Threlfall
Mr. Threlfall suddenly sent me a letter
telling me that the UBC Case had been assigned to Ms. Martha Rans as he was too
busy for it. Ms. Rans met me and asked me to rewrite the complaint many times
to the point that Ms. Rans, my legal advisor and me agreed to find and name a
law student from UBC law faculty to write and present my complaint against UBC
as best as possible.
By this time, it was October 2001, and Ms. Rans has not yet presented my complaint to UBC. Timing of filing the complaint against UBC was not a problem as she agreed with Mr. Threlfall that my conflict with UBC was an ongoing process. At this moment, the search for the law student willing to help me to write better my complaint against UBC as agreed with Ms. Rans was an ongoing process as documented to her.
B2) The reassignment of my complaint against the BC Ombudsman to Ms. Martha Rans without me being informed by Mr. Peter Threlfall or anybody in the commission
The BC Ombudsman case was also assigned to
Ms. Rans, but nobody informed me about it. As nothing had been done for months
with this case and I did not know it was also under the responsibility of Ms.
Rans, I went to see Mr. Threlfall, the officer who originally took the
complaints.
To my surprise, Mr. Threlfall told me that
the BC Ombudsman's case was also under Ms. Rans care; and since the computer
check he did showed that nothing had been done with this other file, he advised
me to contact Ms. Rans and asked her an update on the BC Ombudsman's file.
ASKING FOR AN UPDATE ON THIS BC OMBUDSMAN'S FILE LED APPARENTLY TO MS. RAN'S UNFAIR DISMISSAL NOT JUST OF THE BC OMBUDSMAN'S COMPLAINT, BUT ALSO TO THE DISMISSAL OF THE UBC COMPLIANT.
B3) The reaction of Ms. Martha Rans to my request for an update on the BC Ombudsman's file
Ms. Rans reaction to my request for an
update on the case against the BC Ombudsman was two folds: 1) Ms. Rans suddenly
dismissed the BC Ombudsman compliant without even ever discussing it with me,
told me that I had the right to appeal to her boss in the Vancouver Office if I
wanted, Mr. Chris finding; and 2) Ms. Rans suddenly too dismissed the case
against UBC claiming I have complained too late and that I should have
complianed in 1998 to her office at the same time I complained to the BC
Ombudsman.
Suddenly, the timing to complaint to the human rights office, which was not a problem to Mr. Peter Threlfall and which was originally not a problem to Ms. Rans because it is still an ongoing conflict/process became the problem. Again she told me I had the right to also appeal this other decision to her boss if I wanted, Mr. Chris Finding.
B4) Justifying the complaint against UBC and against the BC Ombudsman to Mr. Chris Finding/Mediation and reconsideration official
With the help of legal advisors, friends and Mr. Threlfall I managed to present formal letter of justification for each case, the UBC Case and the BC Ombusman case to Mr. Finding on November 2001 describing in detail to him what Ms. Rans had done and how she had failed to perform her duties when handling my complaints.
B5) The dismissal of the justification supporting the BC Ombudsman's complaint presented to Mr. Findings.
It is a fact that the BC Human Rights
Commission through Mr. Peter Threlfall received formally my compliant against
the BC Ombudsman, it is a fact that it was assigned formally to Ms. Martha
Rans, it is a fact that she never discussed it with me, it is a fact that she
dismissed it soon after I requested her update on this file as nothing had been
done for months and probably nothing would have been done if I did not ask that
update, yet Mr. Finding still dismissed my justification without even talking
to me. He too told me that I had the right to appeal his decision to
At this point, I met Mr. Finding in his
office in
B6) Justification to Mr. David
Hosking, Mr. Finding's boss in
As indicated by Mr. Finding, I presented a
letter of justification to Mr. Hosking, this time documenting to him how both
Ms. Rans and Mr. Findings have failed me when dealing with the BC Ombudsman's
case, dismissing it without even having discussed it with me, yet again my
letter of justification was dismissed.
Again, almost two years of work on this file was wasted by the BC Human Rights Office when taken the BC Ombudsman file and dismissing it without doing nothing, neither discussing it with me after it was formally received/accepted.
B7) The dismissal of the justification to the UBC Complaint, by Mr. Finding's assistant, Mr. Alan Borden
As months have passed and I have not heard
anything about the UBC case from Mr. Findings, I went to his office to find out
what was going on. Then I was told the complaint had been dismissed, and that a
letter related to that had just been sent to my home address. When I asked if I
could see Mr. Findings, I was told that he did not want to see me as I did not
have an appointment.
When I said I needed to talk to him and that I was not leaving without talking to him, he came out angry. He told me the UBC Complaint had been dismissed and that I had to appeal to Victoria again if I wanted.
B8) Mr. Finding's did not sign the dismissal of the UBC justification, his assistant Mr. Alan Borden did
When I received the letter of dismissal of
the UBC Justification I presented to Mr. Finding in November 2001, it was not
signed by him, but by his assistant/worker, Mr. Alan Borden, which surprised me
as Mr. Findings had been dealing with all these justifications all alone and I
had never met the person that signed that letter.
Again, I was asked to appeal this decision
to
B9) Appealing again to Mr. David Hosking
This time, there was too much at stake so
I was advised to find a law student who could be able to justify properly the
fact that I have been acting in good faith and that since the UBC conflict with
me is still ongoing I had not filed my complaint against UBC late as suddenly
claimed by Ms. Martha Rans and endorsed by Mr. Finding's assistant.
A law student at UBC was assigned and she wrote a very good letter of justification for Mr. Hosking.
B10) Mr. Hosking still dismissed the UBC Complaint
Despite Mr. Hosking's statement in writing indicating that the letter of justification filed by the law student at UBC was excellent, he dismissed the complaint against UBC, taking with it another two years of my life.
Conclusion
THE BC HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, IN MY OPINION, TREATED ME WITH AS MUCH DISRESPECT AND DISCRIMINATION AS THE ONE RECEIVED FROM UBC AND FROM THE BC OMBUDSMAN, AND IT CONTRIBUTED ALMOST TWO MORE YEARS TO MY OVER ALL ORDEAL AT UBC.
C) Lessons to be learned:
1) If UBC has failed you as much as it failed me, it will dismissed your complaints internally to protect its reputation and the people/faculties who failed you, including at the UBC Senate's level as my case shows;
2) If UBC has failed you as much as it failed me, the BC Ombudsman is not a reliable source of help/justice, as my case shows.
3)If UBC and the BC Ombudsman have failed you as much as they failed me, the BC Human Rights Commission is not a reliable source of help/justice, as my case shows.
MY ONGOING SEARCH FOR JUSTICE AT UBC CONTINUES
Right now, my remaining legal and
non-legal options are being evaluated and advise on the best way to proceed is
coming/being sought. UBC is kindly holding all information related to my case
at my request made personally to Dr. Martha Piper/UBC President until the time I
am able to find the legal help needed to ensure that justice comes to me at
UBC.
Hopefully the new UBC President will take
steps to keep that information available for future use, otherwise I still have
original copy of all documents needed to ensure justice prevails. As I have not been able to afford paying a
lawyer to represent me and as I have not yet had direct legal help from UBC
student societies and as
I have yet to find a lawyer to help me for
free or pro-bonus, my case has reached the BC Supreme Court, but it has not
been served yet as still I have no lawyer and I am focusing my attention on
raising my children right now, but it will be served.
Probably going to the BC Supreme Court
together with going to Human Rights International and going public
internationally while organizing student support at UBC and SFU at the same
time may be the best way to proceed. I am very healthy and committed to ensure
my rights, student and individual rights, are finally respected one day in the
near future at UBC. If you can help me, please help me.
Most UBC Officials who failed me are not
longer at UBC due to resignations and retirements(supervisors, committee
members and chairs, deans, department heads, registrars, chairs of UBC Senate
Committee on Academic appeals, ...), but other UBC Officials who failed me are
still working at UBC like nothing has happened to me and my family, 1993-to
now.
Please, see my current academic work despite my academic ordeal at UBC at MY ACADEMIC WORK
**************************************************
*******************************
********************************
**************************************************
How would you feel if you are abused at UBC, and
your Student Society is a witness of it, but
when you ask it to stand up for your
rights fully it forces you to sign your
financial rights away in exchange
of beaurocratic support on
demand, and when the
only remaining option is the
legal one, it denies you even that
beaurocratic support and on the top of that it
hires a lawyer to work formally against you, not for
you?, that is what the UBC Graduate Student Society
has done to me, a fellow Graduate Student in good standing.
(Lucio Muņoz)
***************************************************
Questions and comments to: Lucio Muņoz
Click here to see when this page was last Updated
***************************************************