Though the public furor over the appointment of Birju Dattani as Canada’s next human-rights commissioner centred around his comments about Israel, his resignation on Monday was prompted by a simple lack of disclosure.
Mr. Dattani has used both “Birju” and “Mujahid” as a first name in the past. According to a third-party investigation commissioned to look into his appointment, he adopted the name “Mujahid” when he “embraced a Muslim identity” at 19 years old, though he continued to use both names in public appearances.
Notably, investigators found that Mr. Dattani used the name “Birju” in his academic work and when he appeared on bipartisan panels, “but when the audience was likely to be Muslim,” he used the name “Mujahid.” (Mr. Dattani explained that his choice of name was sometimes “just whimsical,” an explanation that investigators did not accept.)
Mr. Dattani did not list the name “Mujahid Dattani” on his application, even though he used that name as his Twitter handle and on various panels. In the section of his application that asked about other names, he listed “Birju Mujahid” and “Birju M,” but not “Mujahid Dattani”; he said he meant to put a comma between “Birju” and “Mujahid.”
Investigators did not accept that either. “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,’ “ they wrote. They also found that he did not disclose past appearances, writing or scholarship when asked about “actual, potential or perceived conflicts of interest,” or activities that could “bring disrepute” to the Government of Canada.
These findings were ultimately what imploded his candidacy. You can’t mislead – intentionally, by omission, or by an alleged forgotten comma – on an application for a job as influential as Canada’s human-rights chief. But on the question of whether Mr. Dattani’s personal biases would influence his ability to serve in that job, the investigators found him in the clear. “Based on Mr. Dattani’s evidence, the scholarship that was reviewed and provided, we cannot find that Mr. Dattani harboured or harbours any beliefs that would be characterized as anti-Semitic or that he has demonstrated any biases (conscious or unconscious) toward Jews or Israelis,” they wrote.
Reasonable people, however, might review the same evidence and disagree. That evidence included retweeting an article comparing Palestinians to Warsaw Ghetto prisoners (he said his retweet was not an endorsement); his appearance on a panel alongside Adnan Khan, a member of the Islamic fundamentalist group Hizb ut-Tahrir (he said he didn’t know who Mr. Khan was at the time); his participation in a protest outside the Israeli embassy in London (he said he was there as an “observer, not a participant”); his signature on an open letter by Richard Falk, who, among other things, linked the Boston bombings to Israel (Mr. Dattani said he didn’t realize at the time that Mr. Falk penned the letter); and a handful of other activities that garnered the attention of Jewish groups after Mr. Dattani’s appointment was announced in June.
Perhaps, as investigators found, Mr. Dattani’s explanations are credible and he truly does not harbour any biases that would have affected his ability to do the job. But reasonable people could make a different inference, and that perception, really, is all that matters. All Canadians have to trust that the head of the Human Rights Commission can recognize how, for example, anti-Zionism sometimes bleeds into antisemitism, and how the former can be used as a shield for the latter. If there is a perception of personal bias – and in Mr. Dattani’s case, there is plenty of evidence to fuel that perception – that individual is not the right person for the job. It’s actually very straightforward. That might be unfair to the candidate, but this individual is to be tasked with setting the tone, agenda and enforcement of Canada’s entire human-rights regime. Fairness has to come second to what’s best for the country.
It’s an indictment of this government that it couldn’t see the potential problems with Mr. Dattani’s appointment before it became public. It’s the same lack of foresight it demonstrated when it appointed David Johnston to look into foreign interference and Julie Payette to be governor-general, and when it awarded a $133,000 grant to a group run by Laith Marouf, who tweeted about “Jewish White Supremacists” as “loud mouthed bags of human feces.” This is yet another case of wasted time, likely wasted money (the Justice Minister’s press secretary would not comment on whether Mr. Dattani would be receiving a compensation package), and questions about the competency of all involved.
For these sorts of appointments, the perception is the point. And, I suppose, truthfulness on one’s application, too.