CHRC to appeal Warman v. Lemire - let the fun begin
Man go away for an afternoon and wham miss this. A well known westerner comments "Rob Nicholson outmaneouvred by leftist staff (that's my generous explanation.)"
Judicial Review Application in the Warman v. Lemire case
"The application is based on two grounds. It is the Commission’s view that:
The Tribunal erred in law when it found that the manner by which the applicant exercises its statutory mandate could render section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act unconstitutional;
and
The Tribunal’s findings of unconstitutionality also resulted from the adoption of subsections 54(1)(c) and (1.1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, subsequent to the Supreme Court of Canada’ s decision in Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892.
The Tribunal erred in law when it refused to apply section 13 of the Act because a refusal to apply subsections 54(1)(c) and (1.1) would have provided a sufficient remedy in respect of this ground."
...
Brian Lilley comments here.
Either the government is refusing to take a respondible stand on a very public and eminently political issue, hiding behind the courts, or it is not in charge of, or letting its wishes be known to, the CHRC empire. Either way, I'm not impressed with the Conservatives.
Time to Juxtapose Nicholson. Yup - same guy (apparently Minister of Justice) who supported the Winnipeg resolution to dump section 13.1:
*CHRC continues to terrorize citizens of Canada.
*Questions value of CSIS Security Certificates. Fails to deport criminals and terrorists.
From today's G7M.
"Justice officials question $60 million for Security Certificates.
Value for money becomes a question given how ineffective security certificates have become. The federal government's legal battle to deport Egyptian Mahmoud Jaballah, is a decade old, having been launched in 1999. Cases against three other al-Qaeda suspects are also continuing, and unlikely to result in deportation because doing so would send them to homelands where they would probably be tortured.
However, proponents say the security-certificate process would be a bargain at any price, given how the tool was painstakingly created to balance civil liberties with national-security imperatives. Anil Kapoor, part of the “special advocate” class of lawyers recently created to fight these cases, said “the public does win.
If any security-certificate procedure prevents one terrorist attack or ensures the release of an innocent person, it will be well worth the price.”
The issue is that the CHRC operates at arms length it may be that Nicholson has no choice but to at least appear, if not impartial, at least uninvolved.
After the heat they took for firing Linda Keen, maybe they're taking a hands-off approach and hoping the ship will scuttle itself.
No SF - was never a "Ship" - was always a fishing boat with special interest oars and a rotten unwashed bottom.
I liked this:
"The Commission is a servant of Parliament..."
Wasn't Lynch the one who refused to show up when summoned to parliamentary hearings on the CHRC this summer? Given that parliament represents the citizens of Canada, this was an act of contempt.
Some servant.
I wonder if there's some way to get in touch with Scaramouche ?
Her blog's messed up in that it's asking for a login/password when you go to the site.
I e-mailed Scaramouche last night about it as it was happening to me as well Sanwin, she said it's host problem, now today the blog is fine for me.
Still doing it to me but one only needs to hit "Cancel" once or twice and it goes to the post/site.
Probably the "Hate Team" over at the CHRC with little else to do.
>>