ablonczy-whatever-thumb-1.png
ablonczy-whatever-thumb-1.png This article is more than 8 years old

VIDEO: Conservative MP uses “air quotes” to dismiss C-51 concerns from legal experts

“Rule of law?” Whatever! During the final day of parliamentary hearings into the government’s controversial anti-terrorism bill, Conservative MP Diane Ablonczy used air quotes to dismiss an amendment, first proposed by the Canadian Bar Association, that would have put into writing that Canadian judges can’t authorize violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms: “Now […]

“Rule of law?” Whatever!

During the final day of parliamentary hearings into the government’s controversial anti-terrorism bill, Conservative MP Diane Ablonczy used air quotes to dismiss an amendment, first proposed by the Canadian Bar Association, that would have put into writing that Canadian judges can’t authorize violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

“Now the judge has to also consider … something like ‘rule of law’, they have to consider things like ‘principles of fundamental justice,’ whatever that is … There would be such a morass of opinions and considerations that action would be pretty much at a stalemate.”

Got that? Forcing judges to follow this so-called “rule of law” thing will just confuse judges and waste everyone’s time, so “whatever.”

During the clause-by-clause review of C-51, Ablonczy (who had previously accused a civil liberties group representing Canadian Muslims of supporting terrorism — that group is currently in the process of suing the Prime Minister’s Office for defamation) also accused the Green Party (which tabled the amendment at committee) of putting Canada’s national security interests at risk by putting “barriers in the way of protecting Canadian society against terrorism and terror threats.”

You know. “Barriers.” Like the Constitution.

The amendment was based on a recommendation brought forward by the Canadian Bar Association, a national association representing 36,000 lawyers across Canada.

Specifically, the CBA believes “judges should not authorize Charter violations,” as C-51 appears “to provide for judicial warrants to authorize the violation of any Charter rights. This brings the entire Charter into risk, and is unprecedented.”

“It is untenable that the infringement of Charter rights is open to debate, in secret proceedings where only the government is represented.”

And here’s what they proposed to make C-51 better:

cba-ruleoflaw.png

Journalists monitoring the proceedings were quick to react to Ablonczy’s remarks:

Meanwhile, some legal experts were perplexed by Ablonczy’s skepticism of terms used in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

Our journalism is powered by readers like you.

We’re an award-winning non-profit news organization that covers topics like social and economic inequality, big business and labour, and right-wing extremism.

Help us build so we can bring to light stories that don’t get the attention they deserve from Canada’s big corporate media outlets.

 

Donate
PressProgress
PressProgress is an award-winning non-profit news organization focused on uncovering and unpacking the news through original investigative and explanatory journalism.

Most Shared

thumb-sources Podcast

Take Back Alberta Leaders are Training ‘Scrutineers’ to Infiltrate Campaigns and Act as ‘Security’ on Voting Day

Related Stories

Podcast

Ed Broadbent Spent a Lifetime Seeking Democracy, Equality and Real Freedom

View the post
Video

Conservative MP Says He Trusts Porn Companies Won’t Leak Digital IDs of Canadians Who Visit Porn Websites

View the post
Analysis

Ottawa Police Using ‘Intimidation Tactics’ Against Striking Workers, Canada’s Biggest Federal Public Sector Union Says

View the post
Our free email newsletter delivers award-winning journalism directly to your inbox.
Get Canadian Investigative News You Won't Find in Corporate Newspapers.
Our free email newsletter delivers award-winning journalism to your inbox.
Get Canadian Investigative News You Won't Find in Corporate Newspapers.