I affirm my unwavering adherence to all laws governing human conduct.
I was duly invited to Canada through legitimate channels and never remained on Canadian soil illegally for even a single day.
Throughout my time there, I fulfilled all financial obligations, covering expenses diligently, and demonstrated profound love and commitment to my family at every opportunity, even as they chose to remain behind.
In reflecting upon the principles that should guide civilized society, I invoke the words of,
Peter Kropotkin:
“Competition is the law of the jungle, but cooperation is the law of civilization.”
Institutions and Inaction to investigate, with clear Evidence of reprisal. The systemic bias.
This page contains the complete, unedited correspondence and decisions from my all my 5 complaints and appeals to the Ombudsman office of Ontario (files were never disclosed in spite of many emails from over 4 years requesting help and oversight). It is published as a permanent public record for transparency and personal safety given the threats I have received. These documents demonstrate the repeated redirection claiming no jurisdictional power or oversight, another account of procedural barriers I encountered. As an oversight office their lenience make them an accomplice to the inaction and irreparable harm me and my son suffered.
Their acknowledgement of multiple filings
This document remarks the fact that multiple complaints were in duly process the accusations from the university as per video on evidence page is clear this has not began in May 2025 when I was already in Brazil.
I had copied them in all documents or evidence submission I had which he stated as if the case had begun on those dates which was not.
They ignored all my requests for file numbers and which steps could be taken to ensure it was being judicially correct. The documents that follow is the continuation of his embarrassing 2 pages he took almost one year since my first request after he promised on a phone call he would provide me with all the file numbers. Which he never did.
The indiscreet copy and paste
Mr. Min was pressure after months to provide me again with an email trying to appear a little more formal.
He then decided that the best approach would be to copy and paste all this jurisdictional and legal statements from which he can’t quote personally in his message he did this just because I have “rights” and it was getting too obvious that I was being legally abused.
This file has no meaningful words from him and came to complement the above document showing no actual practice of investigation or oversight.
It closed with a mockery calling their obligation a courtesy. As if a human right is a courtesy not a obligation to a human being.
The Final Closure – “We Will Not Be Responding to Any Future Correspondence”
After almost a year of waiting for the first written summary, and after I pointed out the problems with that summary (the false May 2025 start date, the missing file numbers, the refusal to actually investigate the university misconduct and its effect on the Hague case and my son), the Office sent one last letter.
On May 4, 2026, Natalie Feltin, Manager of Early Resolutions, wrote to confirm that the review was now “complete” and that no further steps would be taken. She stated that I had not provided “any new information” that would change their position. Then came the clear instruction:
“We will not be responding to any future correspondence from you on this matter.”
This is the third and final document. After years of complaints, after the long summary that still refused to engage with the actual evidence, after the copy-paste jurisdictional paragraphs that treated basic rights as a “courtesy,” they have now formally told me to stop writing to them.
There will be no further acknowledgement. No investigation into why the University was allowed to destroy my academic record and then use that destruction against me in the family proceedings. No examination of how these delays and obstructions have directly prolonged the separation from my son. No accountability for the pattern of redirection that left every door closed while the child remained in Canada.
They have exercised their discretion to discontinue any review, declared the matter closed, and instructed me to cease contact. This document completes the record. It shows the full arc: from slow, incomplete summaries, through empty formal language, to an explicit order to stop messaging them.
I publish it here, together with the previous two documents, as part of the permanent public record — for transparency, for my own safety, and so that the inaction and its consequences are documented in full.
Four Years of Emails – Never Passed Through Early Resolution Office
From August 2022 until May 2026 I sent the Office of the Ontario Ombudsman repeated, detailed emails and copied them on every major filing and piece of evidence in my cases. University misconduct, thesis destruction, FIPPA obstructions, police conduct, LECA decisions, court delays in both criminal and family matters, and the direct impact on my son’s Hague Convention proceeding — all of it was placed before them, year after year.
They received thousands of pages. They were copied on court endorsements, affidavits, and formal complaints. I asked, over and over, for file numbers, for confirmation that the matters were being tracked, and for the steps that would be taken to ensure judicial correctness. None of those basic requests were answered.
After four years, the file never moved into any real Early Resolution process. There was no investigation. There was no meaningful review of the evidence I provided. What I received instead were occasional short replies that either redirected me elsewhere or, much later, a single long summary that still refused to engage with the substance. When I questioned that summary, they sent the final letter telling me to stop writing altogether.
An Early Resolution Officer is supposed to facilitate resolution and oversight. In my case the communications stayed in a holding pattern for four years and then ended with an instruction to cease contact. The Office never treated the complaints as one continuous, serious matter requiring actual early resolution work. They treated them as repeated new messages that could be noted and then set aside.
I am publishing the record of my own emails here so the full volume and persistence is visible. Anyone can see what was sent, what evidence was provided, and how little substantive engagement came back over four years. This is not a complaint that was investigated and closed. This is a complaint that was never properly taken up by Early Resolution in the first place.
My emails to the Office of the Ontario Ombudsman (2022–2026) will be posted below as part of the permanent public record.
DISCLAIMER : The content on this website, including all posts, chapters, and materials, represents the personal experiences, opinions, and views of the author, Danillo Galdo Gaspar, based on events as I perceive them. It is provided for informational and advocacy purposes only and is not intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice, professional counsel, or a definitive statement of fact.
Any allegations of misconduct, discrimination, collusion, or other issues mentioned herein are alleged and have not been adjudicated in a court of law unless explicitly stated otherwise. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own independent research, verify information through official sources, and consult qualified professionals (such as lawyers or authorities) before forming conclusions or taking action.
This site exercises rights to freedom of expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and aims to raise awareness about potential systemic issues in higher education and immigration. No malice is intended toward any individuals or institutions named, and the author welcomes factual corrections or dialogue to promote accuracy and resolution.
The author disclaims any liability for errors, omissions, or consequences arising from the use of this content. By accessing this site, you agree to these terms and acknowledge that the information is shared in good faith for public interest discussion.
Stop University of Windsor 