Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Lord Conrad Black of Crossharbour, Guilty on Four Counts...

Monica Prince, a juror in the Conrad Black Trial with daughter Denean and granddaughter Nicole.


The Fall of Conrad Moffat Black, Baron Black of Crossharhour...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conrad_Black

After Twelve Days of Deliberation, the jury of Twelve, told Judge Amy Ste. Eve, that they had a Unanimous Verdict.

Conrad Black is Guilty on Four Counts, Not Guilty on Nine Others.
*one count of Obstruction
* three counts of Mail Fraud
His former business associates Jack Boultbee, Peter Atkinson and Mark Kipnis were also convicted on three fraud charges each.

The Jury Job is Done...

And now we’ll listen to what one of the Jurors has to say about the Trial:
(Pls. note that Jurors in the U.S. may talk to the Media after the verdict had been handed down, while in Canada it is Illegal to do so.)

Labeled by some Canadian Media as "blue collar jury" for having members drawn from blue collar workers of Chicago, and despite avoiding the Media during the trial, the label did not escape the Members of the Jury. And they are out to show that they will be able to hand down a verdict Fair and Square as one of the Jurors said during the pep talk among themselves:

"They're calling us country bumpkins. They think we're too stupid to figure out this case."
And the Jury the Media called "country bumpkins" and "blue collar jury" came back with a Unanimous Decision...How fair could you Get?

For more of what Juror pictured in this entry, has to say about the case clik the links:
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/236080


-Frauds... Scams... Mail Frauds will somehow catch up on you, Mr. Black should have known. Investigated for the same wrongdoings by the RCMP in the past, but was never charged for lack of evidence, he had a choice, and His had caught up on Him...and the stain will mark the Legacy of a very intelligent man, although somehow vain, an accomplished Biographer, and a business Magnate.
Now, he wanted his Canadian Citizenship Back, after renouncing it, in order to Become a Life Peer in the British House of Lord. (house resolution of l919, would not allow a Canadian of British subject, now Canadian Citizen to become a member of any British Royalty or granted a peerage, whatever that means). And the reason why, because of the agreement between the two countries for its citizen to serve her or his sentences in each home country for the conviction in the other, and Lord Black figured out that Canadian Jails, if it comes to that, is still Home....
*********************************

Pot laws thrown out, CBC reports



Jul 14, 2007 04:30 AM Canadian Press
Prosecutors say they plan to launch a speedy appeal of a Toronto judge's ruling that Canada's marijuana possession laws are unconstitutional.


CBC News reports the judge made the ruling in dismissing charges against a 29-year-old Toronto man charged with possession of 3.5 grams of pot.


The man's lawyer argued that the federal government made it policy, under Health Canada's Marijuana Medical Access Regulations, to provide marijuana for medicinal purposes, but never made it a law.


CBC News reports that Judge Howard Borenstein agreed that this brought all possession laws into question and dismissed the charges.


Borenstein says he'll wait two weeks before making his ruling official.
Defence lawyer Brian McAllister told the CBC that the ramifications of the ruling, if it stands, could be "pretty big."


Warning: Don’t go out as yet popping those weeds in Front of the Cops, be a little discreet, not good for the Kids...

Sunday, April 15, 2007

PROUD FM 103.9 Toronto Gays' Station on the Air


Tomorrow April 16 at 6.00 a.m. the first ever GLBT FM station will hit the airwaves. PROUD FM 103.9 was granted a license after a 10- year wait, not because of the homophobic attitude of the Licensing Body the CRTC (Canadian Radio And Telecommunication Comm..) but the availability of Air Space.

http://www.thestar.com/artsentertainment/article/203205

Claiming to be the first commercially licensed radio station to specifically target the gay, lesbian and transgendered communities, the Prime Time morning slot will by hosted by a couple of a very well-known commodities Ken Kostick and the (still not outed) Mary Jo Eustace. The pair had been together for more than 600 episodes of "What’s for Dinner" T.V. shows.

For Kostick and Eustace, it's been an easy transition – they like to bring up the fact that years ago, Eustace outed Kostick on television long before it was fashionable ("We though it was an obviousity, but not to all the viewers. Many thought we were married. Can you believe that?" she says). Although as they've been pre-taping a few pieces and preparing for tomorrow's debut, there have been a few slips of the tongue that come with the new gig, although none of the Don Imus variety.

The Mid-Day show will be dejeeyed by Deb Pearce who has this to say about the new station:

"At Jack FM, ( a sister FM station) I didn't want to be looked at as a lesbian, I wanted to be thought of as the talented woman on the morning show. So now I'm exactly who I am and I don't have to change pronouns, I don't have to pretend I have a boyfriend or say I went for dinner on King West last night, instead I'll say I went to Drag Idol on Church St. It's just a sense of honesty that I enjoy," she says.
"This feels like sort of an arrival. And almost a validation, it's important there's enough of us that exist to have a radio station built about taking about our issues, or gay people talking about any issues."


On in the Afternoon Slot enter Maggie Cassella, the lady of Rant, better known for her Loudmouth that being a Lesbian and here what she has to say:

"It is what it is, and they hired me to do what I do. To be honest, I've never had any issues since I moved to this country," said the American ex-pat. "It's never been about me being a lesbian, it's been about me being a woman who's loud and aggressive and that doesn't always work on television, but with radio, every time I check myself, they say no, no, no, don't check yourself."

There is something new coming out of this city in particular and the country in general every now and then and it is healthy. We have evolved. For the Listeners it is chance to hear how different sexual orientations sound or no difference at all.

Addendum:: You can Listen to the Station Live at:

http://www.proudfm.com/player.php



Saturday, April 07, 2007

Canadian "Charter of Rights and Freedom" - Twenty Five Years After...

The Queen and Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau signing the Charter of Rights and Freedom, the Constitution Act of l982..


Twenty Five years after the Charter:

Twenty Five Years ago the "Constitution" came home and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was born.

Canada was created as a Nation by the British North American Act (BNA), an Act by the British Parliament and also the Supreme Law of Canada.. Until the repatriation of the Act, it can only be amended by the British Parliament. It was repatiated in l982.

And since that drizzly ceremony on April 17, l982 where the series of signatures, including that of Queen Elizabeth II was affixed to the Document, Canada has it’s own Constitution drafted and enacted by our own Government. Otherwise known as the Constitution Act of l982, the Charter of Rights and Freedom was entrenched in the Constitution and become the basis of hundreds of Challenges that have gone all the way to the Supreme Court to determine how far
the country will go on abortion, same-sex marriage, the death penalty, private health care, police powers, Sunday shopping and freedom of speech.

Many laws were struck down as unconstitutional and many were upheld.

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/200519


In this entry I will post the few notable challenges and the resolutions:
http://www.thestar.com/article/200518

Oakes (1985)
Established the framework for analyzing all Charter claims – a multi-part test that requires courts to consider whether the government can justify unconstitutional laws or practices. After being charged with drug possession, Edward Oakes successfully argued "reverse onus" provisions in the Narcotics Control Act, which required accused people to prove they were not in possession of a narcotic, violated presumption of innocence.

The Oakes case becomes the basis for which the Courts will determine the Justifiable and Reasonable Limits to all rights. It is now popularly known as the "Oakes Test". You pass the test you win your challenge..

JUDICIAL POWERS
B.C. Motor Vehicle Reference (1985)
Landmark case giving judges sweeping powers to apply the Charter, including striking down laws, a cornerstone for judicial activism. The case involved a challenge to a B.C. law that imposed jail terms on anyone driving with a suspended licence.


This case was the basis where a judge, even in the lower court could declare a particular law unconstitutional and that will make the law ineffective until it is repealed or replaced or modified by the Parliament (Federal or Provincial).

PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE
Chaoulli v. Quebec (2005)
Quebec's ban on private health insurance struck down. In 4-3 ruling, Supreme Court says Quebec government can't prevent people from buying private health insurance for procedures covered by medicare. George Zeliotis, tired of waiting for a hip replacement, had joined forces with Dr. Jacques Chaoulli, who wanted to set up a private medical clinic for the procedures. Case regarded as a referendum on Canadian health care.


Although most basic health care procedures are covered, it is a first come first serve basis. This challenge allow private insurance coverage for procedures already covered by the Universal Health Care.
Note: The federal government has just enacted a law regarding the "wait time" for medical procedures. The law specifies the maximum "wait time" for which a procedure should be performed. That is for electives or non-emergencies.

Security certificate limits
Charkaoui v. Canada (2007)
Supreme Court rules that aspects of Canada's security certificate regime used to detain and deport suspected terrorists violate principles of fundamental justice. People detained on the certificates were generally not allowed to see evidence against them on the grounds it involved "national security."


These particular provisions of Immigration Law, also used to combat suspected terrorists under the anti-terror law also extend the Charter Fundamental Rights to even non-citizens or even illegal aliens.

Most of these challenges were funded by the Government Legal Aid programs, but were slowly but gently cut and some were pro bono basis...


Some of the Provisions of the Charter which I like the most are:

Fundamental Freedoms
Fundamental freedoms 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a)
freedom of conscience and religion;
(b)
freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
©
freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d)
freedom of association.

Equality Rights:
Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law 15.

(1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Through a series of court decision, "sexual orientation" is now included as one among the groups that are entitled to Equality. The coverage is now complete..


And to make sure that each and everyone must be Aware that with these Rights and Freedoms, come the reminder that without Responsibities and Reasonable and Justifiable Limits, such rights will be subject to abuses and failures inherent to human individual. Section 1 is the Check and Balance of the whole Charter.

Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms
Rights and freedoms in Canada
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

There you go, the Supreme Law of the land, may not be perfect, but without it, might as well live in the Jungle....