Canadian Constitution Foundation Seeks Intervener Status in
CCF wants an end to the censorship of the Canadian Human Rights Commission
http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/may2-08_CCF_applies_for_interested-party-status.html
On
PDF of the CCF's
Key points by the CCF of the motion to intervene are:
The Foundation is a credible, trustworthy and objective organization that has expertise and a unique perspective on the application of the Canadian Constitution and the ideals expressed therein, including its essential characteristic: that the Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law, government measure or common law principle that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.
Submissions to be made by the Foundation
This challenge directly involves important constitutional principles, including jurisdiction and the clarity of legislation. Understanding these issues and acting within their prescribe boundaries allows for governance without unnecessarily intruding into the rights of citizens. The resolution of these issues allows government to be effective in what it does by establishing clarity of purpose while eliminating dueling and competing public activities and actors. Generally speaking this leads to efficiency in government while securing the liberty of Canadians.
The Foundation will argue that Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act mirrors Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada and thereby places the Tribunal in the unintended position of acting as law enforcement and the court as they relate to criminal matters. Enforcement of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act by the Tribunal has the effect of finding one liable for an indictable offence minus the indictment, as the ability to lay an indictment falls only within the jurisdiction of the Crown. This instance of jurisdictional trespass by the Tribunal leaves law enforcement and the courts confused as to where their respective jurisdictions lie. The application of Section 13 also has the effect of leaving the public in a state of ambiguity with respect to the criminal status of persons charged under it.
The Foundation will argue that the wording of Section 13 as it relates to '"persons being exposed to racial hatred" as a result of speech is not only vague, but difficult if not impossible to apply unless the trier decides to speculate as to the issues of cause and effect. The offense dealt with
The Foundation will argue that the Tribunal has not been authorized to usurp the criminal law powers of the state, and that laws that are vague ought to be declared void for being such, in keeping with established precedent.
The Foundation will take the position that, to the extent that any limitations placed on freedom of expression by Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act infringes upon constitutional rights, and that due to the aforementioned flaws in its application as well as its composition, the
The Interest of the Foundation in These Proceedings
The Foundation has a legitimate interest in the issues raised by this application. As stated above, the impugned statute allows the Tribunal to act in a manner that violates the constitutional rights of Canadians, and to do so with sweeping powers and dubious authority.
The Foundation is gravely concerned that arguments advanced by Richard Warman, if adopted by this Tribunal, will result in the Canadian Human Rights Commission having the ability to violate the Constitution with impunity and without consequence. The Foundation submits that remedies to the aims sought by Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act already exist in the Criminal Code of Canada and can be derived from the realm of public debate, where it constitutionally belongs.
The Foundation’s Unique Perspective
Our Foundation brings a unique perspective and approach to the issues raised in this application, and has a broader interest in these proceedings than the specific interests being pursued by the respondent. We will not duplicate the submissions of
The Foundation is not clouded by personal, social or political agendas in its understanding of the Canadian Constitution. Rather, it brings clarity of purpose to any constitutional debate by promoting the ideals expressed in the Constitution itself without reference to extraneous considerations
Counsel
Canadian Constitutional Foundation
PDF of the CCF's
Closing arguments in the Lemire Constitutional Challenge are fast approaching, and even with the CHRC just today (
The Tribunal has it’s marching orders from above, and those orders are to stop the absolute demolishing of the CHRC by
Please watch the Freedomsite for updates on the CCF’s application for Interested Party status, and those who are members of the CCF should send in a letter of appreciation.
But the big question still remains.. where is Borovoy and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. He has been getting press from coast to coast talking about the CHRC, but where is he? In they won’t intervene at the most important juncture on a serious challenge of the validity of Section 13.. IF NOT NOW…. WHEN?
Groups, Writers and
| Liberal Liberal Conservative Conservative Ezra Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (Rex Catholic Insight Catholic Register | PEN CDN Association of Journalists Western Standard B'nai Brith Jewish Tribune Deborah Gyapong Lawyer Karen Selick | Globe and National Post David Warren (Ottawa Citizen) Eye Interim Sault Ste. Victoria News |
Constitutional Challenge of Section 13
http://www.stopsection13.com/constitutional_challenge.html
Support
Be part of our team and contribute what you can to defeat this horrible law
and protect Freedom of Speech in
· Via
