A 'Sign' Of Our Debased Democracy

If you are under the impression that our Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows for freedom of expression, please be aware there are apparently severe restrictions on that freedom should you try to express yourself on public property in the vicinity of Prime Minister's residence; perhaps Mr. Harper invoked the notwithstanding clause?


Women told they need a permit for their sign



H/t Occupy Canada

Be Careful Where You Paddle

I guess this is what happens when we forget our place.

The Fluidity Of Our Charter Rights

Judging by both past events and current practices, I think it is safe to say that neither Premier Dalton McGuinty nor Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, along with his underlings, have a great deal of respect for Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

First, of course, there are the well-documented violations of those rights that took place during the Toronto G20 Summit of June 2010, a summit in which both the above-mentioned conspired to deprive thousands of their charter rights throuh illegal arrests, detentions, and search and seizures, both 'leaders' fully aware of their complicity in illegal behaviour.

Unfortunately, however, these Charter violations continue on a daily basis. There is a program in Toronto called Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy (TAVIS), fully endorsed by both McGuinty and Blair and recently guaranteed permanent funding by the Premier, that aims to reduce gang violence in The Big Smoke which this summer has been beset by gun violence.

And while I don't pretend to know what the answer to this problem is, I hardly think it makes sense to go out of one's way to alienate the black community, which already has ample reason to be suspicious of the authorities.

Today's Toronto Star has a disturbing story with accompanying video about four young black men, ages 15 and 16, who decided to assert their rights against arbitrary police stops by refusing to identify themselves and attempting to walk away from the authorities. As you will read in the story, that attempt to enforce their charter rights had a very unpleasant consequence that could have ended in fatalities.

So my question is this: has anyone ever checked on the constitutional legitimacy of programs such as TAVIS? Indeed, would they withstand a Charter challenge?

Contempt For Law Invites Contempt Of Harper Government

Despite its well-oiled propaganda machine spewing out rhetoric defending its 'law-and-order-agenda', the Harper regime is so awash in its contempt for the actual rule of law and its moral underpinnings as to fill any right-thinking person with nausea.

While countless instances of this contempt abound, probably one of the most egregious is its refusal to repatriate Omar Khadr from Guantanamo, despite a pronouncement by the Supreme Court of Canada on the matter and Harper's promises to the United States to do so.

Putting aside the fact that Khadr was a child soldier at the time of his alleged crime, imbued with extreme views by a fanatical father, justice and our Charter of Rights demand his return to Canada.

That, government hate-mongering notwithstanding, is not a matter of dispute, debate, or public opinion. It is the law. To flout that law is to be a renegade regime unworthy of its citizens' respect or support.

Today's Star has an editorial on this ongoing injustice well-worth reading.

Conservatives Insult Canadians' Intelligence Once Again

While the Harper government has repeatedly shown its contempt for facts and statistics as it treads its demagogic path with abandon, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has achieved a new low. In language almost identical to that of George Bush after the terrorist attacks in New York, the Harper minion has told those who fear the erosion of privacy rights through the expansion of online monitoring, ostensibly to catch child pornographers, that they are either with the government, or “with the child pornographers” prowling online.

This shocking affront to logical thinking, known as absolutism, is a tool frequently used by the right-wing to advance causes that can't withstand scrutiny. People may recall the sobriquet that Jack Layton earned (Taliban Jack) for daring to ask questions about Canada's involvement in Afghanistan, or recent rhetoric about those opposing the Gateway Pipeline as 'enemies of the people.'

Once more, these kinds of cowardly tactics amply demonstrate why the Harper government is both unfit and unworthy to govern.

Despite Police and SIU Obstruction, G20 Lawsuit Moving Ahead

I have already written extensively about the G20 police abuses of our Charter Rights and have cited the McGuinty Government's collusion in those abuses as the main reason I cannot vote for the Ontario Liberals in October. However, a story in today's Star is well-worth reading to remind ourselves of how hard the authorities are working to obstruct any efforts at justice, in this case for Dorian Barton, who was severely beaten for snapping a few pictures last summer at Queens' Park, the so-called official protest zone during the G20.

The refusal of Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair to compel identification of the officer responsible for the beating, despite the fact that it was witnessed by 11 other officers, speaks volumes of how politicized the entire process is, as does the failure of the SIU to accept a civilian eyewitness account of the incident.

Yet Premier McGuinty still insists he has nothing to apologize for, despite the fact of his collusion with the police to wait until the G20 was over before revealing that the secret law regarding a five-metre perimeter around the security fence was, in fact, non-existent. I am convinced that it was the fiction about this law that emboldened police to overstep their authority at every opportunity, leading to mass mistreatment and jailing of thousands of people that notorious weekend in June.

McGuinty's Weak Apologies and Bill Blair's Misdirection

Having to watch two politicians, Premier Dalton McGuinty and Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, working hard at damage control today over Andre Marin's excoriating report and calls for their respective resignations, was not pleasant. Listening to their efforts to obscure their culpability in lying to the public regarding the so-called 'five-meter' law was even harder. Fortunately, our digital world allows us an electronic record that is indelible. Therefore, I am reproducing a blog post I wrote on June 29th that reflects the duplicitous nature of both the aforementioned gentlemen.

If you have the patience to read the entire post, please pay particular attention to Blair's explanation as to why he didn't reveal to the public the fact that there was no law that allowed his forces to arrest people coming within five meters of the perimeter fence. As well, note Premier McGuinty's comments that summit weekend about the necessity of having extreme measures in place, surely an allusion to the non-existent law, a fact he only revealed after the summit had left town.

Police Chiefs and Premiers

I have to confess that my nose is presently feeling quite abraded and raw, not surprising given its strenuous workout in today’s smell tests, beginning with the spectacle of Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair displaying a cache of ‘weapons’ seized from protesters that turned out to be less than claimed. First, an astute CBC reporter asked about the cross bow that was given prominence. Hadn’t that, in fact, been seized from a car before the summit began and determined to have nothing to do with the G20? Well yes, the good chief sheepishly admitted that it shouldn’t have been there, as reported in The Globe and Mail:

A car search last Friday netted a cross bow and chain saw but they were not determined to be G20 related, and no charges were laid. When this was pointed out, Chief Blair acknowledged the items should not have been displayed but said “everything else” was seized from summit protesters.

However, police also included objects taken from a Whitby, Ont., man who was heading to a role playing fantasy game in Centennial Park Saturday morning. As was reported by the Globe on Saturday, Brian Barrett, 25, was stopped at Union Station for wearing chain mail and carrying a bag with an archery bow, shield and graphite swords. His jousting gear was seized by police, but was on display Tuesday, even though he was not charged and police told a Globe reporter it was a case of bad timing.

The critical thinker, of course, would have even more reason after this display to question the veracity of what he or she was being told. But then things got worse. Blair announced that there was no five-metre rule in place allowing police to search bags and demand identification from interlopers who had violated the police’s ‘comfort zone.’ His justification for this alleged lie: “I was trying to keep the criminals out.”

I say alleged lie, because this came only after an announcement from the Ministry of Community Safety made an announcement that “all the cabinet did was update the law that governs entry to such things as court houses to include specific areas inside the G20 fences — not outside.

A ministry spokeswoman says the change was about property, not police powers, and did not include any mention of a zone five metres outside the G20 security perimeter. “

However — and my nose was really starting to hurt by this point — we remember Dalton McGuinty’s statement of support for the police on Friday after word got out about the secret order-in-council suspending some of our Charter Rights:

Premier Dalton McGuinty denies it was an abuse of power for his government to secretly approve sweeping new powers for police.

“I just think it’s in keeping with the values and standards of Ontarians,” McGuinty told the Toronto Star on Friday amid a battery of complaints from opposition parties, city councillors, civil libertarians and regular Torontonians that the new rules were kept secret and, some say, may go too far.

The rules allow police to arrest and potentially jail anyone refusing to produce identification or be searched within 5 metres of the G20 security zone.

“Most Ontarians understand that there’s something extraordinary happening inside our province,” the Premier said. “We’ve tried to limit the intrusiveness to a specific secure zone as much as we can by working together with our police.”

Despite the fact that it was front page news on several of Ontario’s dailies, Premier McGuinty did nothing to disabuse the public about this seemingly inaccurate information, which leads me to conclude a number of limited possibilities:

He is so inept a Premier that, despite the alleged regulation having been passed secretly by his Cabinet, he knew none of the details;

Chief Blair was lying about these special powers, promulgated throughout the media and eliciting mass confusion and outrage. Were this so, wouldn’t it be incumbent upon McGuinty to immediately terminate the Chief, having gone far beyond anything General Stanley McCrystal did to warrant firing?

He was colluding with the police to continue to perpetrate this ‘falsehood,’ a possibility that would justify our asking how committed the Premier is to Charter Rights and basic democracy;

The regulation was as everyone understood it, but because of the widespread revulsion it inspired, the Liberal Government, realizing the potential political consequences to be so very costly, disavowed any relationship to the odious regulation, therefore requiring Bill Blair to ‘fall on his sword’ over this issue.

The fact that the position of Chief of Police is, de facto, a political one, would likely have convinced Blair that his future would be far better served by obeying his political masters than hewing to the path of integrity.

Further evidence of government and police lying to the public emerges as the McGuinty Government is now stating that no one was arrested under any extended laws, but only regular criminal laws. The critical thinking public will, of course, want to know why 31-year-old Dave Vasey was arrested when he ventured within the allegedly non-existent boundary, refusing to either show his i.d. or allow his bag to be searched, believing he was only enjoying his basic rights of citizenship. Told he would then have to leave, he refused, after which he was arrested under this ‘non-existent’ rule. What then, was the offense for which he was arrested?

These and other questions must be forcefully asked and re-asked in the days to come. To do anything less would be criminal.

G20 Summit Inquiry

">
While I have written extensively elsewhere on the abuses of Charter Rights that took place during the G20 Summit in Toronto last June, I was heartened by some information received from the Real News Network about the extent of the latest inquiry, to be conducted by the Office of the Independent Police Review director. The information is as follows:


Ontario G20 Police Review Director Makes a Pledge

Gerry McNeilly: Will conduct a systemic review of police actions during G20 after complaints from citizens indicate a ‘pattern of behavior concerns’.

Oct. 5 TRNN - A review by the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD) will delve into the method behind the madness of Toronto’s G20 policing fiasco.

In an interview with The Real News, Senior Editor Paul Jay asked director of the IOPRD, Gerry McNeilly about whether his review would address specific incidents, such as the kettling of peaceful protesters on Queen Street, the intolerance of self-identified journalists, to the extent of arresting or being violent towards journalists, and the absence of police during the notorious police car burnings being a strategic move to validate other police hostility. McNeilly, said the review will be systemic, and will address all incidents mentioned in complaints received by his office, including unlawful arrests, detainment, treatment of journalists, and the training and culture that police were exposed to in preparation of the summit.

In an interview with The Real News, McNeilly said both the nature and volume of complaints received by his office compelled him to conduct the review. He said the complaints pointed to a pattern of police behavior that warranted investigation.

“And that led me to look at the authorities that I have under the legislation, and the authorities indicated that I have the ability to conduct a review of a systemic nature when a pattern of behavior concerns developed. And this was that situation,” he said.

The IOPRD has the legal authority, under the Public Inquiries Act, to issue subpoenas and conduct searches if evidence or testimony is not forthcoming.

“I have the power, and if I have to use the power, I will,” he said.

Investigating the Integrated Security Unit, the policing body responsible for security during the G20, is tricky as it consisted of Toronto police but was headed up by RCMP chief superintendent Alfonse McNeil. McNeilly said his jurisdiction doesn’t extend to the RCMP.

“I cannot review the RCMP and its role. I will talk to the RCMP to find out about its role and what part that they played in policing and providing security for the G-20, but I don't have the authority. That's the Canadian Police Commission's role,” he said.

He said he doesn’t know of any review being conducted of the RCMP’s role in the G20, but said he would be talking to chief superintendent Alfonse McNeil.

“And, as I said, to date I have not had any indication that they are not prepared to cooperate with me,” he said.

The Real News has raised concerns over the Public Works Protection Act, and the Breech of the Queen’s Peace legislation, that were cited in most of the arrests during the summit, as they appear to negate the constitutional right to free assembly. McNeilly said his office will be investigating unlawful arrests, including ‘the tools that were used’, but said his authority doesn’t permit him to review the constitutional legitimacy of legislation.

“I am not specifically going to be reviewing any piece of legislation as to the appropriateness of that legislation, you are correct. That's for the courts to do.”

He said his review will be transparent, but will not include public hearings in order to expediate the process. He said his biggest challenge is addressing the volume of complaints quickly enough that the findings remain current and meaningful to the public.

A Two-Part Interview with Clayton Ruby

Before starting this political blog, I wrote extensively on my other blog about the abuses of Charter Rights during the G20 Summit in Toronto by both the police and the Dalton McGuinty Ontario Liberal Government.

In this two-part interview by The Real News with Clayton Ruby, the well-known Toronto lawyer discusses both the legality of what happened on Toronto streets in late June, as well as possible ways to prevent future suspensions of our rights.