[...]
[10] More significantly, however, having now had the benefit of considering the question in circumstances different than those in which I was placed on the morning of May 9, 2008, I am not persuaded that the witnesses are exposed to a real and substantial risk that undue hardship will be caused to the persons involved, as contemplated in s. 52(1)(c) of the Act, nor that there is a serious possibility that the life, liberty or security of a person will be endangered, as contemplated by s. 52(1)(d) of the Act. The excerpts from the Internet cited by the Commission in its submissions do not, in my view, satisfy these criteria. They are indicative of no greater risk than that which has been suggested in the past by comments addressed to other participants in this and other s. 13 cases, including counsel, Tribunal members and staff, and the parties themselves.
[11] I am therefore rescinding the order. The hearing will be conducted in public, as mandated by s. 52(1) of the Act. I would note for the record that the Commission is mistaken in its submissions that the order came about pursuant to my ruling of May 7, 2007, which had merely excluded cameras from the Tribunal premises. That ruling preceded the exclusion order. No request has been made for me to revisit the May 7th ruling and as a result, cameras will remain excluded from the Tribunal's premises.
[...]
Journalists Win Right to Access Star Chamber
I was just forwarded a copy of a Tribunal decision that has overruled the Human Rights Commission's invocation of Section 37 of the Human Right's Act. Section 37, as you may or may not know, is a clause of the HRA that allows tribunal proceedings to be held in secret, if the tribunal determines there is any threat to safety of witnesses.
Rogers Communications, on behalf of Macleans Magazine, has been fighting the tribunal to allow journalists to be present when Commission employees Hannya Rizk and Dean Steacy, will be forced to testify, under oath, of allegations that members of the commission (and Dean Steacy himself) indeed planted racist messages on websites, which were subsequently investigated by the commission.
There are also allegations, that Richard Warman, as a non-commission employee gave inappropriate direction to members of the Commission on how to proceed on cases in which he was a complainant.
Warman and Steacy have long fought to prevent giving such testimony, and recently have fought to prevent having such testimony published, citing concern for their safety.
Well, today the Tribunal finally disagreed. Thanks in no small part to the public pressure that Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn have helped garner.
Excerpts from today's ruling:
1 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Journalists Win Right to Access Star Chamber.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.mikebrockonline.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/44
The ruling to close the CHRC hearing to the public has been rescinded. Read more, from Mike Brock; Rogers Communications, on behalf of Macleans Magazine, has been fighting the tribunal to allow journalists to be present when Commission employees Hannya... Read More
31 Comments
Leave a comment
Links
Contact
Stuff
All you neocons have proven is your vindictive nature. Your cruel obsession with destroying the reputation of great Canadians like Richard Warman is most reprehensible. If people are to bend the rules and commit impropriety, I'd rather it be people like Warman, rather than people like Lemire.
Fuck you very much, Mr. Brock. Fuck you Levant. Fuck you for attacking Canada.
Troll, or just off his meds?
Let me get this straight, Elton. You're conceding that Mr. Warman may have broken the law, but that it's okay because he did it for a cause with which you agree. That tells me absolutely everything I need to know about you, and people who think like you. Fascist.
*
yeee-ouch... that's gonna leave a mark.
pucker time for hannya rizk, dean steacy
and "lucy" warman.
say, elton... why don't you head back to
myblahg... and groom some of the other
monkeybots?
*
Elton..you must be absolutely apoplectic that your 'heroes' (Warman et al) are being shown to have clay feet..it must really sting, and burn right to your very core. One more avenue for closet communists like you, to circumvent law and hold sway with your filthy diatribes is teetering on the verge of collapse..
Go home and cry, you big Marxist baby.....
Elton says:
"Your cruel obsession with destroying the reputation of great Canadians like Richard Warman is most reprehensible."
You got it backwards. The only thing being destroyed is freedom of speech you fool. I almost feel sorry for you.
Almost.
I hoping that Elton there is just some stupid kid, that has no idea what is transpiring here. They really have no choice but to open the hrc's to the public. The more people find out about these secret trials taking place in Canada, the more alarmed they are. Only a complete idiot would believe that it is ok to use underhanded tactics for the cause, any cause.
I wanted to leave a comment ref Elton's remarks but seriously - they speak for themselves - Thank you to Mr Ezra Levant and Mr Mark Steyn for exposing the ugly underbelly of the HRCs and the mindset of their supporters.
*
well, i guess elton and warman and their ilk...
are just gonna have to slink away and lick
each others, uh... wounds.
*
"If people are to ... commit impropriety, I'd rather it be people like Warman, rather than people like Lemire."
Admirable to have your preferences in a row like that, BUT how 'bout we strive instead to assure no one bends the rules or commits "impropriety?" Novel concept to you, Elton?
What's the matter Elton, did your house of cards collapse?
Will you picket the hearing with a sign demanding the right for secret trials?
Will the words on the sign be misspelled? Will you be in a nice little costume?
Will there be a carboard coffin at your protest?
Will you throw a pie in someone's face?
You are an idiot!
History in the making.
In honesty, 6 months ago, who here could have imagined such a turnabout.
Ezra Levant will forever be my hero, come what may in the future.
On March 25th, let us show the liars and cheats and "benders of rules" that we are better, nobler, and more worthy of respect than they are. It's not enough to know that we are right. We have to show that we are right.
I'd be very alert for troll voices who will seek to discredit those who have fought to free speech these past few months. That's what they will do when they get truly desperate.
Oh Boo Hoo Elton darling. For such a loving creature like you, the language you use is a bit too outré. Du calm, mon cher ami(e?)
Good stuff and a shining victory, thanks and congrats to all involved.
By the way, elton, I enjoyed your head popping meltdown. Cake, meet icing...
Mike, you missed the killer quote:
[8] Mr. Lemire later challenged those objections before the Federal Court, which has the exclusive authority to rule when such matters arise before the Tribunal. Interestingly, however, it appears that a few weeks before the January 15, 2008, Federal Court hearing into these objections, the Commission disclosed to Mr. Lemire the information that was the subject of the s. 37 application. The Court therefore determined that since the information had been disclosed, it could no longer “properly” consider the s. 37 application, which the disclosure had effectively rendered moot. In effect, the Commission disclosed the very information that it had previously claimed could not be disclosed pursuant to s. 37. I note that the Commission also withdrew, before the Federal Court, its s. 37 objection to the issuance of a subpoena of Bell Canada (see the Federal Court’s ruling, January 15, 2008, Docket no. T-860-07).
[9] The outcome of the s. 37 matter gives me pause to question the soundness of the Commission’s invocation of public security concerns with respect to the testimony of these witnesses.
Let me translate: since the Commission invoked s. 37 only to later fold like a house of cards, it has cried wolf and now has zero credibility with the hearing officer.
The CHRC is f*cked.
Misprint in the original memo? It says "in circumstances different than those in which I was placed on the morning of May 9, 2008". In any case, this is great news! I hope the major Canadian media pay attention and take advantage of this ruling to send reps.
DV, one might infer from the Tribunal Ruling p(8) that the CHRC was possibly in contempt of Federal Court with the release of the s37 information. At the very least they rendered the Lemire challenge frivolous and should be held accountable for costs.
Umm... Elton. If Warman is such a glowing example of Canadian citizenship then you and he should relish the opportunity to prove it to the world. Let us see for ourselves whether he is the great defender of Canadian Human Rights or a petty Stalinist.
I'll look at the legal details in a minute....meanwhile.
GOAL!!!
(Darn, blinking text is not permitted.)
This is great news. Thanks, Mike.
It is also excellent that this case is gaining traction in the wider media. Rick Mercer did a rant about Ezra's plight in his latest RMR. Major papers are picking it up in dribs and drabs. Slowly but surely the word is getting out there.
This could be the greatest leap forward for true human rights in Canada in a decade or more.
Mike-
You said "There are also allegations, that Richard Warman, as a non-commission employee gave inappropriate direction to members of the Commission on how to proceed on cases in which he was a complainant."
Actually, Warman WAS working for the CHRC when he filed the Lemire complaint and for some time afterward. Of course, Warman claims worked on the complaint in his spare time, i.e. he was "off-duty".
If an off-duty policeman illegally broke into someone's house to seize evidence without a warrant, wouldn't the courts nevertheless suppress any evidence? Why should it be any different for an off-duty CHRC employee? If Warman was working for the CHRC when he leveled his complaint, the complaint ought to be treated as if it came directly from the CHRC.
If an off-duty policeman illegally broke into someone's house to seize evidence without a warrant, wouldn't the courts nevertheless suppress any evidence? Why should it be any different for an off-duty CHRC employee?
Perhaps because there is no evidentiary standard?
Refreshing to see a bias towards openness rather than the elitism practiced so earnestly at CHRC and so many other relics of the Trudeaupian state...bravo Ezra!
Isn't it likely that "Elton" IS Warman?
Actually Elton, Lemire, vile though he may be for his alleged views, didn't break any laws, therefore your note about your preference for whom is able to, ah, "bend the rules" is exceedingly dishonest; what you really are saying is that you are fine with people breaking the law, with "bending the rules" as long as they are people with whom you agree.
The best measure of societal freedom isn't that it will support popular opinion; rather a society is most free when unpopular thought is allowed to be expressed. As long as Lemire isn't on a soapbox in downtown Toronto advocating the mass extermination of Canadian Jewry I say let idiotic views he may have be expressed, they shall surely wither and die when exposed to the harsh light of reason.
Also, your childish use of gutter language reveal you for whom you undoubtedly are; small minded and partisan to a fault. I myself am a member of the GPC, I am hardly a "conservative", though I do admit to having rather libertarian views on freedom of speech. If I can admire Steyn and Levant for their support of freedom in Canada surely you can as well?
If equality under the law is a NeoCon trait I'll proudly own up to being a NeoConservative Elton. You see Warman is being held accountable for his actions, he will now know what it feels like to be accountable for his actions and words. He is finally being held accountable for working outside the norm and persecuting people for MERE words not actions. This vile man appears to stand for everything our Brave Military Members have fought and died for Elton, freedom Elton freedom. Something we assume is our legal right has been taken away by the HRC under section 13. Warman ideals apparently stand against those that died preventing fascism and communism spreading across Europe. Elton Warman's ideals are not mine. I want him held accountable for his actions, Maximum Disgustus is over Elton. The end justifying the means is not acceptable.
Mr. Lemire was deemed a Nazi by HRC, I have seen no evidence that validates this assertion. He's been smeared to futher the HRC employees and Warman's agenda, until I see EVIDENCE that he is in fact a Neo Nazi I consider the complaint filed against him in collusion with HRC staff a smear on his name and reputation. I have friends that are Liberals but that doesn't make me a Liberal, sullying Mr. Lemire reputation without hard evidence is a slippery slope under Civil Law. If he's vindicated I hope he sues the crap out of the HRC and Mr. Warman for Libel and Slander.
Been watching this from beyond Canada with interest. I was struck by the APPEARANCES at the tribunal which included: “Simon Fothergill/Alysia Davies For the Attorney General of Canada”. Is this normal? Or, is someone higher up keeping a close eye on what is going on?
Seems that justice may well be done.
Re: Elton can't you feel the love from the liberal
Can't we feel just the love and the tolerance? As usual, the hate and vitriol and nasty language come from a liberal, proving that a hate speech is any speech a liberal hates and a hate crime is whatever a liberal specially hates.
LOL Elton - thanks for the funny post. The words, phrases and sentence structure mirrors several others - and most likely self - generated.
But truly - "great Canadians" do not break the law, they do not use special influence to commit potential violations of the criminal code and they do not become members of the websites they attack.
This is not about right or left - it is all about right or wrong!
And BTW Elton - I am a Lefty - one that has become so appalled at the actions of various liberal governments - my next vote is up for sale.
Right, Elton is either Warman or Kinsella. Either way he needs to stroke his Barney doll and prepare to take the medicine.
Anybody want to give odds that Dean Stacey et al will not testify for whatever reason at the 25 March hearing? Somehow they will weasel their way out of it.