Monday, October 11, 2004

Saskatchewan Justice?

My first time in a Saskatchewan court a young man was charged with letting his dog run at large in a park. The judge asked him how he pleaded and the young man said “not guilty”. The young man told the judge that he did not own a dog and it was discovered that he was given a ticket because he was the only child in the park that was old enough to be issued a ticket. The judge and the prosecutor then started in on the kid telling him if he pleaded not guilty that he would have to hire a lawyer and the fine imposed could be hirer. The kid was bullied into pleading guilty and was fined. The court was not concerned with justice, the court just wanted to get their hands into the kids pocket and take his money. A Childs first time in court should not leave a bad taste in his mouth for the rest of his life. I wrote to the Attorney General detailing what happened in court and received letters from the city solicitors office and the attorneys generals office saying that they appreciated input from the public. The next time I attended court the accused were asked into a closed door room to enter their plea. My next parking ticket I was looking forward to seeing what went on behind that closed door. There was a glass window opening into the registry with a small round hole in it. I was asked how I pleaded and then what my grounds were. The person in the registry became angry and demanding when I asked for a trial date over and over. At one point he said “this is legal” and after a half hour of the same threats of a higher fine and having to hire a lawyer that the kid endured he set a trial date. This was my first experience with a Charter Right violation and the Saskatchewan Justice way of hiding a problem with the court behind closed doors.

The Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan has rules written by the Chief Justice by way of a Practice Directive. I asked a lawyer about the rules and clear Charter Rights violations and he said that they had one propose, and that was to keep lawyerless litigants like me out of court. I filed a Section 52 Challenge on the Rules like the requirement of an address for service in the City of Regina and others that violated the Charter. In a conference call the Chief Justice told me that if not for his practise directives there would be a flood of lawyerless litigants wanting into his court. He said he did not have the financial resources or enough judges to handle the increased cases. The lawyer was right, the Chief Justice was denying access to the court to the very people that needed access the most. The poor and the disadvantaged. In doing this he was allowing the Government of Saskatchewan to continue to scam and defraud the people of Saskatchewan with Acts like the Automobile Accident Insurance Act.

“It is not only the rich who need the law. Poor people need it to” - Beverley McLachlin, chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada.

In the eight’s a truck hit one of my old motor bikes and the Government insurance offered me a pittance of the value of the bike. I had a Statement of Claim in their hands shortly after and filed a section 52 on many sections of the Automobile Accident Insurance Act that infringed on my Charter Rights. I received a call from a lawyer with the Government of Saskatchewan’s constitutional Law Section and explained the Charter infringements to him. He said he did not want to have to attend to court in Saskatoon when it was a clear violation of my Charter Rights. He called me back saying that he talked to SGI and it was like talking to people from another country. He ran into that bureaucratic brick wall of to hell with his Charter Rights and we are going to do as we please that is so well protected by the Chief Justice. I received a offer to settle from SGI a week later on the condition that I withdrew my Section 52 and I accepted. The Government of Saskatchewan Constitution Branch has knowledge of Charter Right infringements in the Automobile Accident Insurance Act and yet SGI continues to scam and defraud the people of Saskatchewan to this day. It is only in Saskatchewan that Charter Rights are openly infringed and where the courts openly protect the Government of Saskatchewan at the expense of the Charter and Human Rights of the people of Saskatchewan.

I asked a lawyer about a judge that was in trouble because he removed door knobs from the court house in Prince Albert. The lawyer told me that it had nothing to do with the door knobs and he was in trouble because he was not “toeing the line”. This was the first time that I heard that there was no independence for a judge in the Court Of Queen’s Bench in Saskatoon. This was common knowledge within the legal community. This was a strong message to the Judges of the Court, “toe the line” or else. This raised a serious question, were the orders of the judges based on the evidence heard in court or their requirement to “toe the line”. That question has been answered many times by the orders of Justice Hrabinsky and Justice Dovell.

In the nineties I opposed the appointment of two Saskatchewan judges to the court by way of an affidavit Notice of Motion in Chambers. The appointment of judges to the court should not be based on what the lawyers have done for the government appointing them, it should be based on the qualifications of the lawyers. An independent judiciary is essential to confidence in the integrity of our justice system. Judicial independence protects the public, democratic process and the Charter Rights of Canadians. The nomination process has to be free of patronage and political manipulation. The end result of the NDP practice of appointments to the bench over an extended time is a morass of corruption and incompetence judges who are required to “toe the line”.

No comments: