Ruminations

Blog dedicated primarily to randomly selected news items; comments reflecting personal perceptions

Saturday, August 14, 2010

The Judge Awarded What? To Whom?

"It is a central tenet of the rule of law that everyone is required to obey the law and all are entitled to the protections of the law, even those litigants who may be deserving of little sympathy. In that latter category would be members of gangs reputed to be engaged in some of the most serious of illegal misconduct in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia." Federal Court Judge Michael Phelan
Well, then, that's fairly straightforward. Isn't it? Got problems with that? With, for example, members of a criminal gang, the founder of which has been sentenced in the United States to 30 years' imprisonment for his part in the unlawful activities of a cross-border drug smuggling ring being guaranteed access to the very same protections as any other member of society. How admirably high-minded.

And delicately noble. Or is it twisted, that a convicted felon, one whose life-work has enriched him and his other gang members while destroying the lives of drug-addicted people incapable of helping themselves by leaving their drug habit - the end result of which they are destined to live a life of desperate poverty and petty crime to support it - is required by law to receive fair justice ensuring his 'rights' are not trodden upon.

The logic is a trifle slippery here. Jurisprudence is an extremely exact science, and legal minds pride themselves on the quality of the justice they mete out on the one hand, and on the other their ability as prosecutors/defenders to slip through providential interstices where they may, in a game of legal dice. On the surface, however, all citizens, the honest individual who has never run afoul of the law, the violated and the violator alike (theoretically) receive equal justice.

Canada Revenue Agency, it would appear, made unwonted information demands with respect to the earnings of some of the members and associates of a grubbily notorious crime cartel naming itself - some might aver puckishly appropriately - the United Nations. Legal protection (to privacy) under the law has been impacted in a way that a federal court judge has held to be in conflict with the gang members' legal rights under the Constitution.

"There was an air of disregard for the citizen's legal rights, including confidentiality, obligations imposed on CRA officials, which elevate the unlawful conduct to one deserving of some reprobation", ruled Judge Phelan. The UN associates had brought suit against the Canada Revenue Agency, having taken umbrage over the impolite tactics employed, challenging the content of letters and the serving of documents.

Carried out late at night, in the presence of police cruisers at the homes of the gang members. Drawing embarrassing attention to their presence, within the neighbourhood. "Police presence was clear and visible and highly obtrusive." Deliberately and offensively so, to the extent that these poor harassed criminals felt dreadfully abused by the process which the judge characterized as "invasive and unjustified".

Noble declarations in the defence of criminals to whose feelings and emotions the general public is, to say the least, fairly indifferent. One of the challengers happens to be awaiting trial in British Columbia Supreme Court with two others with respect to importing cocaine. Two others of the challengers have been dispatched, so to speak, in a gangland settling of accounts. These insults to society can be indulged as needful of justice.

To the extent that Judge Phelan has awarded $200,000 for the appellants' legal fees. To be handed over to the United Nations gang members who brought suit, from the federal government. This is tax money to the tune of $200,000 which the government is adjudged to owe to conscienceless criminals. Who should be prosecuted, judged and sentenced for their crimes against society.

And most certainly not held up as prime examples of 'citizens' in need of protection from government agencies because their 'rights' have been impinged upon.

Labels: , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

 
()() Follow @rheytah Tweet