- Harper- Con'd Again

Submitted: 7:33am PST & 8:25am,PST, 13 Mar.'10 The Star
Travers: In Ottawa, even deciding what's secret is secret, Sat Mar 13 2010
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/779406--travers-in-ottawa-even-deciding-what-s-secret-is-secret#article Tab1

I have the greatest respect for justice Frank Iacobucci and anyone who has or is sitting on the bench of the SCC.

However, I can't, for the life of me, understand why Mr. Iacobucci would agree to getting dragged into this sordid affair in this fashion.

Unless it is a full public Judicial Inquiry, I can't see him coming up with any result that won't put him squarely in the middle of a power struggle between Stephen Harper and the Conservative government and Parliament. Also, I don't recall hearing anything from him regarding this, not even a reporter saying they phoned his office but got not reply.

In light of the statements by University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran that:

"If these documents were released [in full], what they will show is that Canada partnered deliberately with the torturers in Afghanistan for the interrogation of detainees . . . There would be a question of rendition and a question of war crimes on the part of certain Canadian officials. . . . "
(CBC, News, 5 Mar.'10)


If such documents exist, would Harper let Mr. Iacobucci see them. If so, would he let him report on them. If so, would Harper release this part of the report to the public. If the answer is no to any of these questions, and I think the likelihood of this is very high given it's Harper, all we would get is Mr. Iacobucci making not mention of the documents referred to by Prof. Attaran. Does that mean Attaran is lying? the documents have been destroyed? Harper is justified in hiding them? And, how does Parliament, and ultimately the Canadian people, find out.

First, this is a power struggle between Harper and Parliament. By agreeing Mr. Justice Iacobucci is, whether directly or indirectly, putting the Judiciary in the middle, thus blurring the separation of the Judicial Branch from the Executive and Legislative Branches. The only result can be a Judiciary tainted with the allegations of bias, no matter how he concludes.

We have all seen how Harper, MacKay, and all the Con's viciously attack anyone that dares to voice an opinion not totally in agreement with their own. So, if Mr. Justice Iacobucci comes down on the side of Parliament, we can expect no less and this, whether anyone likes it or not, will impact on the dignity of the Supreme Court of Canada, as an institution.

In fact, given, Harper and the Con's expressed contempt for our judiciary and in particular Supreme Court and desire to bring it under their thumb, they may take that as an excuse to do just that.

If Mr. Justice Iacobucci comes down on the side of Harper, it will not solve anything since it is non-binding and, in fact put Parliament in a position to insist even harder or concede that Parliament is there at the whim of Harper.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html