Courts: Do bizarre rulings indicate ideological power-play?

“(But) I expect judges to make the determination using reasonable criteria, based on the facts before the court… the court created or made-up a fact situation and tested the minimum sentence against the made-up facts.” – Alan Shanoff, Toronto Sun.

In his column “Courts making it up” appearing on October 24th (1), Toronto Sun solicitor-emeritus Alan Shanoff describes how “made-up facts” (i.e. invented situations which haven’t actually occurred) were used by the Supreme Court of Canada as a basis to overturn minimum-sentence legislation passed by Parliament.

To my mind, this indicates two things.

Firstly, the power of the courts to thwart the will of the people as expressed through legislation passed by their elected representatives is now pretty-much complete.

And secondly, this ability to enforce “slap-on-the-wrist” penalties for serious breaches of the law can be used to defy society’s efforts to impose penalties that will deter lawlessness and disrespect for property and person.

Which brings us to the questions “who would want to do such a thing, and why?”

The following is taken from my article “Judicial subversion?” (2) published by Canada Free Press in August, 2003:

“In my August, 1999 column, ‘Triumph of Anarchy?,’ speaking of the Law Union of Ontario, I had this to say: ‘There are termites gnawing away at the fabric of freedom where one would least expect to find them, hiding behind trusted and respected office in the corridors of power and influence… Virtually unknown, the Law Union of Ontario is an association of political activists employed in the legal field, the members of which seek to change society by favouring selected social and political policies. To quote from the Law Union News issue of January 1978, ‘The Law Union, as a forum for political discussion and debate, provides us with a potential vehicle to break out of our role as intellect workers, and to develop our intellectual powers in Baran’s sense of developing an historical analysis which can lead to basic social change and the overthrow of Capitalism.’ (Emphasis added). The membership of the Law Union of Ontario includes judges, lawyers, clerks, secretaries, and quite possibly Crown Attorneys.”

The Law Union of Ontario is alive and well to this day (3), and in the “About” section of its web-site we find the following:

“The Law Union of Ontario, founded in 1974, is a coalition of over 200 progressive lawyers, law students and legal workers. The Law Union provides for an alternative bar in Ontario which seeks to counter the traditional protections afforded by the legal system to social, political and economic privilege. By demystifying legal procedures, attacking discriminatory and oppressive legislation, arguing progressive new applications of the law, and democratizing legal practice, the Law Union strives to develop collective approaches to bring about social justice.”

That doesn’t leave much room for doubt as to where they are coming from… And fear not, there are other, similarly-motivated law unions to be found throughout Canada.

This causes me to be concerned that between them, Law Union-type “progressives” may have now achieved a numerical superiority on Canada’s Supreme Court, and can use the massive power this confers in order to “…develop collective approaches to bring about social justice.”

Justice, as they see it.

In my column “Bravo Newfoundland!” appearing in Canada Free Press in December, 2002, I had this to say:

“The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has long been used by the courts to overturn the laws of the land, and to flout the expressed will of the people. The Charter has become a weapon used by special interest groups, sexual deviants, phony refugee claimants and others to further their agendas. The qualities of common sense and responsibility have been replaced by an orgy of ‘empowerment’ as governments have had their social programmes not merely altered, but sometimes even replaced by policies the courts feel to be more in tune with the Charter’s ‘intent’… The frustration felt by all levels of society is very real. What is the point of choosing between political parties and electing representatives, if the courts can not only disallow legislation, but even replace it to the extent of changing the very direction in which society is travelling? The courts, already a laughing-stock because of the abysmally inadequate penalties handed out for even the most serious of crimes against person and property, invite hostility and disrespect for the Rule of Law with their self-righteous posturing and tinkering.”

Bear in mind, that was written not quite thirteen years ago. And as I also observed in that column, “This hand-in-glove collaboration to destroy our society is a little too convenient for my liking, and I do not doubt for one second that it is being done deliberately. We are in severe danger if these tools for the destruction of our society remain intact.”

I believe that current events may well prove my suspicions back then to have been well-founded.

And whether or not the Supreme Court’s actions are caused by Law Union-type infiltration, or by politically-motivated appointments, these further developments do indeed give me grave concern for the future of our society and our country.

Time to wake up, Canada…

Jeff Goodall.

(1) – See “Courts making it up” here.

(2) – See “Judicial subversion?” here.

(3) Visit the Law Union of Ontario’s web-site here.

(4) – See “Bravo Newfoundland!” here.

Comments are closed.