The sad thing about Judge Cullen's decision to allow an injunction against Canadians trying to protect our parkland from the Kinder-Morgan pipeline is that there is a precedent in BC law he could have considered. (1)
On May 28, 2004, BC Supreme Court Justice Quijano refused an injunction against the occupiers of Cathedral Grove. She noted in her decision that the contempt-of-court injunction should be used sparingly because it can result in "legitimate concerns of citizens"ˇ to be used by "special interests" to transfer the dispute to a court.
Quijano also noted there are already laws against direct actions. A contempt of court ruling without other laws being broken is an assumption of guilt.
Justice Quijano had no desire to see her court used by special interests to circumvent citizen complaints. Judge Cullen apparently has no qualms about his own court being so used, despite his claim to respect the right of citizens to protest as long as they do it well away from the destruction.
Jim Erkiletian
Nanaimo BC
(1) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Citation: British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Sager et al,
2004 BCSC 720
Date: 20040528
Docket: S40511
Registry: Nanaimo
[url=http://www.cathedralgrove.eu/media/02-3-bc-sager.pdf]http://www.cathedralgrove.eu/media/02-3-bc-sager.pdf[/url]
