Pierre Elliot Trudeau, the arrogant politician who dismissed Canadians as "easily manipulable economic units", left behind a ticking time-bomb when he retired. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has long been used by the courts to overturn the laws of the land, and to flout the expressed will of the people. The Charter has become a weapon used by special interest groups, sexual deviants, phony refugee claimants and others to further their agendas. The qualities of common sense and responsibility have been replaced by an orgy of "empowerment" as governments have had their social programmes not merely altered, but sometimes even replaced by policies the courts feel to be more in tune with the Charters "intent". The British Columbia government, for example, was recently ordered to finance the treatment for parents of autistic children.
The frustration felt by all levels of society is very real. What is the point of choosing between political parties and electing representatives, if the courts can not only disallow legislation, but even replace it to the extent of changing the very direction in which society is travelling? The courts, already a laughing-stock because of the abysmally inadequate penalties handed out for even the most serious of crimes against person and property, invite hostility and disrespect for the Rule of Law with their self-righteous posturing and tinkering. And, as I indicated in my August, 1999 column "Triumph of anarchy?" there are those in the judicial system only too ready to use their power to set damaging precedents in order to stick-handle our slide down the slippery road to chaos and enslavement.
As I said at that time, "There are termites gnawing away at the fabric of freedom where one would least expect to find them, hiding behind trusted and respected office in the corridors of power and influence. Once in a while the curtain parts a little, and allows us a shadowy glimpse at those who are behind the scenes, manipulating both people and media in order to change society to suit their collectivist agenda. In this case it could be the Law Union of Ontario that we see Virtually unknown, the Law Union of Ontario is an association of activists employed in the legal field, the members of which seek to change society by favouring selected social and political policies. To quote from the Law Union News issue of January 1978, The Law Union, as a forum for political discussion and debate, provides us with a potential vehicle to break out of our role as intellect workers, and to develop our intellectual powers in Barans sense of developing an historical analysis which can lead to basic social change and the overthrow of Capitalism.".
This hand-in-glove collaboration to destroy our society is a little too convenient for my liking, and I do not doubt for one second that it is being done deliberately. We are in severe danger if these tools for the destruction of our society remain intact.
Which brings us to Newfoundland. On December 12, the Globe and Mail carried an article by Kirk Makin titled "Judicial activism has gone too far, court says". Here are some excerpts: "One of the countrys highest courts has issued an extraordinary ruling, saying judicial activism has gone too far and calling for the curtailment of judges powers to second-guess politicians and overturn laws. In a 3-0 ruling seen as a direct challenge to the Supreme Court of Canada, the Newfoundland Court of Appeal warns of potentially widespread unrest arising from undue incursions by the judiciary into the policy domain of the elected branches of government. The court said the separation of powers between legislatures and the judiciary was forged in bloodshed, a historical reality that has been forgotten as contemporary judges tinker with legislation." And finally, the Newfoundland court is quoted as saying "The lessons of history accentuate the perils of revesting ultimate decisions over policy in institutions controlled by persons without elective mandates to make such decisions (The Charter) does not confer on the judiciary untrammeled license to usurp the policy domain of the elected branches of government "
Bravo Newfoundland! It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court of Canada reacts to this slap in the face.