Communicating with Lawyer at MOF

Informing of Constitutional Crisis

August 15th 2023, Lawyer at MOF:

I am legal counsel for the Ministry of Forests. Your below note has been forwarded to me for response. If you are seeking review of a decision cancelling a tenure issued under the Land Act, your recourse is to the Supreme Court of British Columbia. Please refer to the process set out in the Judicial Review Procedure Act.
If you need advice about your legal rights and options, you may wish to consult a lawyer.  My role, as a lawyer in the Ministry of Attorney General, does not extend to providing legal advice or opinions to members of the public…

August 18th, 2023, My response:

Thank you for your response and legal advice.
Did Erin Keith or Rick Fraser place before you my communications with them in regards to this matter as it doesnt appear to be addressed in their communications at all.

August 29th, 2023, My follow-up:

I attach my unanswered correspondence with your boss, the AG/MOJ Arif. I assume that you have received the communications with Erin Keith and Rick Fraser as part of your due diligence in the provision of legal advice so I will not bother to forward those details to you. As an official representative of the justice system if you could see to providing a response to my letter that would be a positive step forward to restoring trust in Canadians democratic institutions. A lack of response will be understood as conduct that is not in good faith in the pursuit of the truth to serve justice in the public interest.

August 29th, 2023 MOF Lawyer:

Your attached email is addressed to the federal minister of justice. I act as legal counsel for the Province, Ministry of Forests. The judicial system is independent of both levels of government.
I do not intend to respond to your letter to the federal minister of justice as that is not my place.
I do not provide legal advice to members of the public. Feel free to consult a lawyer of your choosing or reach out to the resources suggested.

August 29th, 2023 My response:

Your legal opinion is incorrect. The Judiciary does not operate independently to "both levels of government". Judicial Independence does exist to protect the public from improper influence by the Executive and Parliament and judicial power is properly checked by Parliament representing the interests of the public. The public service exists to serve the public interest. If you have a different perspective as a reasonably well informed person, please let me know how this decision serves the public interest? My understanding is that you have sufficient evidence to conclude that the administration of justice is not in compliance with the law and your conduct is beyond your authority.
I attach the correspondence with Premier Eby. I also note that the Minister of Forests, Katrina Conroy has been informed of the situation. I have received no communication to dispute a claim by the Judiciary that they may ignore all the evidence that any Canadian could provide including the transcript in order to fairly dispute the allegations that you make. David Eby has also been informed of the problem of the BC Law Society refusing to discipline a lawyer not complying with court orders and falsifying evidence. Let me know how you would justify that a fair trial could be conducted under this regime?

August 29th 2023 Lawyer at MOF:

Thank you for forwarding your letter to the Premier, Trevor. I am not familiar with these matters and do not understand their connection to the issue you raised with Ministry of Forests about the recent cancellation of your licence issued under the Land Act. I stand by my statements respecting the different levels of government and the independence of the judiciary.

August 29th 2023, My Reponse:

A breach in the Charter requires a restoration of the breach. There has been no restoration of the breach just a denial of the public perspective and a constitutional crisis with the AG's offices of the Province and the Federal government "declining to participate" in a debate on the constitutionality of the Judges Act served in a constitutional question in regards to legally determining if the statute, "largely written by judges" adequately protects the public right to fair and impartial trials and fundamental justice.
Your office, the provincial attorney general's office has declined to justify their claim to authority. It is not the first time.
I stand by my statements regarding the independence of the judiciary.
Let me know how you perceive your legal and ethical role in reporting criminal activity as a lawyer serving the public interest in having a functional justice system so that the disasters that the preamble to the UN Human Rights code will not be inflicted upon Canada. David Lametti, the former AG/MOJ of Canada knowingly permitted the constitution of Canada to be broken and refused to justify that conduct, clearly in bad faith. I am reporting that crime to you. because I cant report the crime to the RCMP as they claim they will destroy evidence if I do so.
I appreciate your communication. I seek the public interest of truth and justice to be served which I believe would properly be a restoration of the tenure and a commitment from the government to bring the operation into compliance as it is all a result of the breach. I can provide more context to this statement when ready.

August 31st 2023,

No response received, yet.