Posts Tagged ‘G20’

English: Supreme Court of Canada building, Ott...

Two very positive developments I’ve seen from Canada’s judiciary in the two months since the latter days of 2011 are Canada’s Supreme Court decision regarding the constitutionality of a federally mandated national securities regulator, and the Ontario Superior Court decision that the application of a three-year mandatory minimum sentence in one case amounted to “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Despite corporate-controlled mass Canadian media sources such as The Globe and Mail repeatedly telling Canadians that Canada is the only G-20 country not to have a national securities regulator, as if that’s supposed to make them feel bad, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously decided that such a plan is unconstitutional, without the agreement of all provinces.

So what if Canada is the only G20 country not to have a national securities regulator? A national securities regulator in the United States didn’t stop the 2008 financial crisis that was the most significant since the Great Depression.

While a national securities regulator was unconstitutionally created in the United States in 1934 with the subsequent blessing of the United States Supreme Court, Canada’s Supreme Court stood for the Constitution, and for the better protection of the finances of Canadians with a decentralized financial regulatory system that is less susceptible to capture by corporations and more adaptive to positive change.

While the United States Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in 2011 that it was just fine for police to break down someone’s door without a warrant if they suspect evidence of drugs is being destroyed, an Ontario Superior Court judge ruled on February 13, 2012 that a three-year mandatory minimum sentence for possessing a loaded weapon amounted to “cruel and unusual punishment” in its application to a man who was holding one in the privacy of his own home, simply to show off the pictures to his friends on Facebook.

Read Full Post »

G20 logo

A year later, the repercussions of the 2010 G20 conference in Toronto have been coming out in the news.

There were over 1000 arrests, more than 300 charges, 59% of which have since been dropped, and police violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by arbitrarily detaining some protesters using a method called “kettling,” which the self-admitted liar, Toronto’s police chief, Bill Blair, says they won’t ever use again.

Despite being able to host the G20 in a remote location as the G8 conference was, or on nearby Toronto Island, I believe they intended to have it in the midst of downtown Toronto to capitalize on an inevitable mass conflict and crackdown.

On August 11, 2011, a Toronto judge ruled that on one particular night of the G20 summit, “[t]he only organized or collective physical aggression at that location that evening was perpetrated by police each time they advanced on demonstrators.”

I propose a novel response for future G20 conferences — a boycott. Just as political parties boycott elections when they know the vote will be rigged, I think a boycott is the appropriate response for future G20 conferences.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. I fully expect a boycott to get no real traction if it even gets mentioned as a serious proposal in the mass media, but I sincerely think it is the way to go, as I see the powers that be standing to make further gains from the current unorganized and predictable approach of its alleged opponents.

Read Full Post »

Canada’s federal government blatantly disregarded Ontario’s provincial law requiring private security firms and their guards to be licensed, in the run-up to the 2010 G8/G20 summits.

As the Toronto Star reported on June 8, 2010:

The security firm awarded a government contract to provide private guards for the G8 and G20 summits is not licensed in Ontario.

Contemporary Security Canada, a Vancouver-based company that did private security for the 2010 Winter Olympics, was hired by the RCMP to provide about 1,100 private guards for the Toronto and Huntsville summits.

Security industry members say licensing is a rigorous process that normally takes six to eight months.”

“The clock is ticking down to the G20. For the aim of public safety, we’re moving forward with the process to have them licensed quickly with all the due diligence necessary,” said Laura Blondeau, spokeswoman for Minister Rick Bartolucci.

Blondeau said the Ministry became aware of the CSC’s contract no more than two weeks ago.

This story shows how:

1) Canada’s federal government doesn’t bother to familiarize itself with provincial law, or simply doesn’t care about it.
2) Even Canada’s largest province plans on buckling under the pressure of the federal government.
3) While claiming “public safety,” by moving to license the security firm in time for the summits, in half the usual time, Ontario’s government is indicating that their current licensing requirements are overburdensome, or they’re cutting corners and putting public safety at risk.

Canada’s provincial governments are granted exclusive jurisdiction over certain powers by the Canadian Constitution, just as U.S. states are by the U.S. Constitution, and the federal government can no more disregard provincial law than provincial governments can disregard federal law in their respective exclusive jurisdictions.

Read Full Post »