Evidence in support of application for Intervener
Re: The legitimacy of the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act
My evidence consisted of
1. The unanswered Enforcement Procedure of the Charter contained within the unanswered Constitutional Question
Attempts to communicate with the PMO following a failure of the Minister of Justice to comply with his constitutional duty to protect the public and see that the administration in compliance with the law.
The PMO did forward to the Minister of Justice who finally did respond but unfortunately made false and misleading statements as to his duties.
My response to the Minister of Justice correcting the errors in his letter but generating no further response.
Outlining some of the many problems at the Canadian Judicial Council:
I quoted from the Justice Department Reports,
and most importantly correcting David Lametti’s assertion that he had no lawful authority and the legitimacy of the supremacy of Parliament over the Judiciary and not the other way around. However the legal advice of many lawyers is contrary and is an attempt to remove rights from people.
The problem is that the judiciary like lawyers have attempted to remove all allegations of misconduct and expand their legal and ethical boundaries beyond the public interest and into their own self interest.
The enforcement of the rule of law is the constitutional duty of the Minister of Justice, equality before the law is all part of the protection of the public.
The legal advice of the Minister of Justice to seek legal advice from an independent lawyer was not accepted. I had previously investigated that possibility and was denied at every turn. A failure of trust to stand and protect the public interest over their own was universal.
The Minister of Justice is the highest law officer in Canada but share with all lawyers a duty as they are all Ministers of Justice.
I hope I made myself clear.
5. I included my communications with the RCMP National Division requesting they investigate the Minister of Justice for protecting a private interest ( his friends and colleagues of lawyers and judges ) over a public interest.
The communications that I had with the Parliamentary Ethics Commissioner and their acceptance of my brief. However they have not responded further, I believe that is because if criminality is discovered that ends their mandate and the RCMP presumably takes over…
Lastly I included the relevant parts of my submission to court disclosing a failure in the rule of law throughout the Canadian legal system and a request for a writ of mandamus, an order of the Court for a Minister to comply with their duty. The legal threshold is the “balance of conveniences”, a very low bar.
The decision of the Judge was delayed until Feb 14, 2022 when the Judge did not show up at all and the Minister of Justice enforced the Emergencies Act upon Canadians, knowing that accountability in the legal system was being requested by the Enforcement Procedure of the Charter, A Constitutional Question and the Writ. His evidence demonstrates a failure to act in good faith, lying as to one’s duties and refusing to respond are hardly acts that generate the requisite trust that is required.
The transcript from that hearing and some commentary are provided here or as part of the full pdf package that was presented to the court.The other parts of this application
Emergencies Act A Failure of Good Faith: Lametti & Trudeau
Request for Intervener status at Federal Court of Appeal https://ruleoflawcanada.substack.com/p/request-for-intervener-status-at…Federal Attorney General Response https://ruleoflawcanada.substack.com/p/response-from-ag-in-fca-re-emergencies… Legal argument for evidence to be admitted in public interest. https://ruleoflawcanada.substack.com/p/my-written-representations-to-the…
This is the full pdf file of my evidence and argument https://fundamentaljustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/INTERVENER-MOTION-ACCEPTED-BY-REGISTRY-4-APRIL-2024.pdf
Thanks for reading. Have a great day.