Chief Justice supports criticism of Kenney
- Thread starter CDNBear
- Start date
It's not the government's court system, it is our court system.
The government works for the people and everyone of them, from the PM on down to Bloc membership carrying/NDP interim leaders all serve at our pleasure. I really, really wish they would try to remember that.
Kenney was out of line with his comments.
The government works for the people and everyone of them, from the PM on down to Bloc membership carrying/NDP interim leaders all serve at our pleasure. I really, really wish they would try to remember that.
Kenney was out of line with his comments.
Has anyone noticed that Bev has merely placed her support behind a complaint from the Canadian Bar Association?
And that complaint stems from the fact that Kenney has implied that due process be forgone, while Canada deals with an immigration problem?
All Kenney has to do is, have the legislation changed to...
You get charged.
You get arraigned.
You get tried.
If convicted you get one more kick at the cat.
If you fail there...
You get shipped home.
None of which is restricted by the Charter.
It is however restricted by present legislation.
So long as the old legislation is still on the books.
The Crown is held to the letter of the law.
And the deviating by coercion of the gov't, is a Charter violation.
And that complaint stems from the fact that Kenney has implied that due process be forgone, while Canada deals with an immigration problem?
All Kenney has to do is, have the legislation changed to...
You get charged.
You get arraigned.
You get tried.
If convicted you get one more kick at the cat.
If you fail there...
You get shipped home.
None of which is restricted by the Charter.
It is however restricted by present legislation.
So long as the old legislation is still on the books.
The Crown is held to the letter of the law.
And the deviating by coercion of the gov't, is a Charter violation.
Last edited:
The SCC and all it's justices should always be perceived to be as impartial as is humanly possible and given that it is they who ultimately decide upon the constitutionality of legislation enacted by the govenment, to speak out publicly against the government would be, at the very least, unseemly. So to lend her voice to the condemnation by backing the statement of the bar association seems smart to me. That's just my impression.
Kenney isn't stupid. He may have been speaking to the faculty of law at Western but I'm sure if he was a betting man he could have made a cold killing over betting on just who would be the first to condemn his statements. Immigration lawyers. Not exactly darlings in the perception of the general public. I'm certain he was just playing politics.
That's just my take.
But what he implied was still wrong, on principle. You do not mess around with the standard of due process.
You can't deny that this stupidity is in line with what this government has done from the start.
Arms length civil servants have lost their job because they were political liabilities to this government, just because they were doing their job. Interviews are scripted. Now they want the judicial system pressed under their thumb as well.
I wouldn't have been surprised if the Justice Minister scratched out some text.
Arms length civil servants have lost their job because they were political liabilities to this government, just because they were doing their job. Interviews are scripted. Now they want the judicial system pressed under their thumb as well.
I wouldn't have been surprised if the Justice Minister scratched out some text.
That just proves that the charter has serious flaws. The only right illegal or undesirable immigrants should have is a speedy trip back home. Not years of taxpayer funded lawyers.
You're right...we really ought to strive to have a system of laws that more resembles Sharia.
Are you folks serious? You think fairness should only apply to Canadians on Canadian soil? That's ****'n ridiculous.
You ot to give your head a shake. Too much socialist claptrap in there.
There is no relationship between Canada deciding who should or should not be given the privilege of living in our country and Sharia law. There are thousands of good hardworking people that would be an asset to Canada. We do not need criminals from elsewhere hiding behind our charter and taxpayer funded lawyers to stay here. Nor do we need the cost of illegal immigrants with no skills landing on our shores and getting free services that many Canadian taxpayers don't qualify for. It should be quite simple- enter the country illegally or commit a major crime while here and you are gone. That is more than fair.
Fairness should apply equally to all persons the world over. We don't have a say in what goes on in other nations, not easily anyway, but we damn sure do have a say in what goes on in this nation. If we believe in these principles than we apply them, equally and fairly, to all persons within this nation.
Charter Rights and due process of law are principles and principles do not have exceptions. If there are exceptions, than they are not principles.
Nonsense. You're another who throws socialist in where it doesn't fit. The means of economic production have crap all to do with issues of constitutional law...
You either agree that fundamental justice is the system we have and should have in Canada, or not. Right now, you are posturing that we should not have justice for all. That's why I use hyperbole in comparing your opinion to those who support Sharia. It's an exaggeration meant to illustrate, you have a common opinion that some people should have more rights than others. That puts you in league with the Chinese government as well.
I hardly think that we should be more like an Islamist government run by Sharia law, or the Chinese government when it comes to basic rights. But that's just me. Apparently you and a few others are fine with that.
This shows that you have a fundamental ignorance of what we're discussing. If someone alleges that an immigrant has done something wrong, our Minister would like to throw them out of the country. Allege.
Of course they should be booted if they do commit crimes. In Canada we have a process for determining what did happen.
When did Kenney get LLB after his name? Is he Justice Minister? Answer to the questions is he doesn't & he isn't. He should just pack up his tent and go back to his Citizenship Ministry and lord over it as the "Smiling Bhudda" and stay out of areas he is unqualified to impune.
Kenney is the one who, as Minister, brought in legislation that now creates two classes of Canadian citizen - those born outside of Canada, to Canadian parents, do not have the same rights as those born in Canada, to Canadian parents.
I have no respect for Kenney.
I have no respect for Kenney.
It is all about economics. We Canadian taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for lawyers for illegal immigrants that the government deems undesirable. There are lots of desirable would be immigrants that are left waiting because of que jumpers. Fundamental justice has nothing to do with deciding who we let become citizens. You seem to feel that those that enter the country illegally or are criminals should have more rights than ligitimate prospective immigrants simply because they got here by breaking the law.
Socialism has nothing to do with justice. If you want public corporations in charge of our constitution, then you're plainly deranged.
Do you even know what this topic is about? It's about the Minister wanting power to throw out immigrants based on allegations of criminal past, not because someone jumped through illegally. Try reading a topic before jumping in...
It doesn't? So what do you care about que jumpers then if you don't think fairness should apply to who is allowed to immigrate?
Shockingly you have misinterpreted what I wrote. Try reading again, you might recognize that I have said no such thing. But I guess in topsy turvy world where you apparently live, fairness and equality before the law translates to having more rights than someone else...for the record it doesn't.
So when someone comes up with a similar logic chain for stripping you of due process in a legal affair (which could all stem from an unproven allegation), you'll be OK with that? It costs too much for a trial so we'll just assume everyone is guilty and go from there?
Kenney used to be my MP in Calgary SE and I liked the guy but he does need to back off some of this. CDNBear was spot on when pointed out it is the gov'ts job and responsibility and function to revise legislation that is ineffective. If Jason Kenny doesn't like the way things are being handled in the courts than his office can re-write the law so it functions as the people of the country wish it to.