LISTENING TO FORMER TORY JUSTICE MINISTER PONTIFICATE ABOUT LAVSCAM IS JUST A LITTLE TOO MUCH SO I PULLED OUT THIS ITEM FROM MY ARCHIVES TO ILLUSTRATE THAT HE WAS JUST AS BAD A MINISTER OF JUSTICE AS JODY WILSON-RAYBOULD...A plague of all their houses....
CANADIAN JUSTICE SYSTEM - UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED
2009 version...2014 version would see
a completed wall (JUNE 01 NEWSLETTER)
August 30, 2013
TO: The Honourable Peter MacKay FROM: Roger Callow aka ‘The Outlawed Canadian’
Minister of Justice & AG of Canada 208-2220 Halifax Drive
284 Wellington Street Ottawa, ON K1G 2W7
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8 PHONE/FAX: (613)521-1739
1) old aphorism: ‘Not to decide is to decide.’
2) ‘Organized crime and corruption flourishes in regions and countries where public interest in institutions is weak. Refashioning the institutions of Kafkaesque autocracy into ones that support democracy by promoting accountability and transparency is a troublesome, long-term process’ McMafia Misha Glenny
3) ’… That’s changed completely, says Ottawa lawyer, David Scott. Now, the unrepresented litigant is frequently smarter than the represented litigant and his lawyer combined. The idea that all these people are deranged is over….Many of the self-represented litigants Windsor law professor Julie MacFarlane interviewed have lost faith in the justice system. “People are really angry,” she says. “What is it exactly we are offering people when we say access (my underlining RWC) to justice? If we continue to use it as a mantra without really delivering on it, and we don’t listen to what people are saying, I don’t know where this is going but down….” Lawyerless litigants ‘treated with contempt’ Don Butler Ottawa Citizen Jan.02-13 A1
1) Many years ago when former Quebec Premier Jean Charest was an Opposition Tory M.P., he was the only M.P. to reply to my concerns relating to the Employee’s Case (Canada) by saying that he would forward my comments to the Tory Justice critic, Peter MacKay. I never heard back.
2) Perhaps if something had been done at that point, Canada and Canadians would not be looking at ‘a failed state’ due to the machinations of the Justice System in 6 different courts and over 30 judges in a 28 year unresolved rinky dink labour matter where no compensation has been paid. The Canadian collective bargaining agreements are in tatters as well as the whole of the sanctity of the Canadian justice system.
3) How did this debacle come about? …When the Justice System foolishly permitted themselves to be part of a government scam in which the B.C. Legislature was hi-jacked in 1985 (BILL 35)and the justice system was co-opted to sanction a ‘sweetheart deal’ between Employer and Union. The gerrymandered appointed government arbitrator (deceased) was cited as being ‘patently unreasonable’ when his arbitration favouring the employer, the West Vancouver School District, over a ‘laid off’ senior teacher was later quashed by the court leaving this plaintiff in limbo.
4) It is not the intention of this letter to detail legal events in the past 28 years which is found elsewhere on the website. The focus here is to pinpoint excesses by judges requiring their removal from the bench if the Canadian Legal System is to be retrieved from a state of anarchy.
5) In making her adjudication in 1986, Justice Mary Southin (r. 2004) asked for all memos from the Employer and Union regarding the lay-off which she later returned ‘because she did not use them’. That apparently innocuous action, it is submitted here ,placed the court into a position of being blackmailed for if those documents were ever revealed in a future hearing, Justice Southin would be on trial for hiding this government scam…and that would never do.
6) By failing to retain me to salary as per the collective bargaining rules, no doubt the hope was that I would sue for ‘wrongful dismissal’ in which employment would not be returned and a maximum of two years salary (which was earlier offered and rejected by me) would be paid. By pursuing this matter as a ‘breach of contract’, an entirely different set of laws applies in which the employer is currently responsible for 28 years of back salary plus interest appropriately compounded. That sum exists apart from any judicial findings as to the propriety of my lay-off which has not yet been established thanks to judicial cupidity.
7) The Justice Spencer hearing in B.C. Supreme Court in 1995 is telling as to the source of this continued hoax by the Justice System. As plaintiff, I requested that the court return employment to me due to the failure of the employer to return to court as so ordered by Justice Southin. The Employer failed to return employment to me as earlier recommended by her. Spencer was not interested in calling on the memos nor was he interested in changing the should to must return employment due to the apparent abandonment of this case by the employer. While noting that I was ‘not to be made a target of judicial abuse’; nonetheless, he failed to order a re-arbitration as per Southin’s earlier Order nor did he return me to salary while awaiting finalization.
8) Spencer placed all his eggs in one basket by claiming that I was bound by any outside agreement between Union and Employer.
9) While the Employer was prepared to sign, the Union would not without my acquiescence which they were not going to get leaving an impasse. The point here is that in any signed agreement, the Employer would be, one and at the same time, released from any further expense while I would be in a position to sue the Union with the entire story coming out…and that,too, would never do….
10) The B.C. Labour Board (B117/2002 Laura Parkinson Decision) refused to hold any hearings (in which the memos would be revealed) under a Section 12 Hearing declaring that the Union had done nothing wrong by neither pursuing this case or, alternatively, as I was willing to offer, to permit me to pursue the case at my own expense.
11) I always believed that I had access to the courts apart from the Union but in this particular case, the succeeding courts declared that only the Union could represent my interests. By this time, the Union had joined forces with the Employer in opposing my bid for justice which was supported by the court. That ‘Universality of Unions’ question, a key one to the survival of the Union Movement in Canada, was never heard by the Supreme Court of Canada hence leaving me in limbo without a lower court decision on which to to fall back. That’s a first for Canada for ‘there can be no judgment without process’ and that process was usurped by the judges accounting for a second trip to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004 under the ‘ultimate remedy’ collective bargaining laws which made reference to the impairment of the Justice process in handling this case. Rejection for a hearing on this basis is tantamount to anarchy.
12) Currently, Chief Justices of the B.C. Supreme Court and Appeal Court, are refusing to acknowledge duly laid actions with fees paid. B.C. Attorney General, Suzanne Anton, has been notified of my protest (July 29-13).
13) AS FEDERAL MINISTER OF JUSTICE, I CALL ON YOU TO PLACE SOME SORT OF TRUSTEESHIP OVER THE B.C. JUDICIARY WHICH MAY TAKE SUCH FORMS AS ‘PEACE, ORDER AND GOOD GOVERNMENT’, THE ‘NOTWITHSTANDING CLAUSE’ OR SIMILAR FEDERAL CONTROL OVER A PROVINCE.
14) The second request is even more egregious, if that is possible. In 2010, Deputy Justice of the B.C. Supreme Court Anne MacKenzie, among other things, expelled me from the Justice System for reasons best known to herself. Various courts have weaseled out of addressing this draconian Order which is now on Appeal (DC-12-1872) in Ottawa’s Divisional Court. This action is uncontested and is to be decided (I have opted for no hearing) in early November. The MacKenzie Creed, if permitted to stand, reduces Canada to that of a ‘failed state’. The most recent submission from Justice Cullen enclosed herein (2 pages) plus my response reinforces those accusations of judicial perfidy.
15) THE SECOND REQUEST IS THAT SHOULD THESE THREE JUDGES FAIL TO QUASH THE MACKENZIE ORDER (FOR WHATEVER REASON), THEN EVERY ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN TO REMOVE THEM FROM THE BENCH. FAILURE ON THIS LEVEL WILL BE A DIRECT NEGATIVE STATEMENT REGARDING YOUR OWN POSITION AS MINISTER OF JUSTICE IN THE TORY GOVERNMENT OF PRIME MINISTER STEPHEN HARPER.
Document received from Hon. Associate Chief Justice Austin Cullen dated July 23-2013:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Docket S106159 (Vancouver Registry)
Between: Roger Callow (Plaintiff)
And: The Board of School Trustees of School District No.45 and West Vancouver Teachers Association (Defendants)
BEFORE THE HONOURABLE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE CULLEN Tuesday, the 23rd of July, 2013
THIS COURT, on its own motion and without a hearing, at Vancouver, British Columbia on Tuesday, July, 23, 2013, ORDERS AND DECLARES THAT:
1. Roger Callow shall not initiate any proceedings or seek leave to initiate in any Registry of the Supreme Court pertaining to or in any way connected with the subject matter of the proceedings in the Supreme Court of British Columbia Vancouver Registry File Nos. S08728, S075775, S022978, A950147, or pertaining to or connected with the subject matter of his allegations against the Defendants in this action or arising from or related to that subject matter.
2. Any document or process filed by Roger Callow in contravention of this Order or any process inadvertently filed or received by the Registry is a nullity to which the Defendants will not be obliged to respond.
BY THE COURT (signed) CULLEN J.
RESPONSE OF THE PLAINTIFF:
1) How is the above Order different from the (undocumented) Order of Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie dated October 1, 2010? There are key differences as outlined in the subsequent CA038538 labeling her actions as ‘patently unreasonable’ which the B.C. Appeal Court Registry rejected for reasons best known to itself. No response has ever been received from Chief Justice Lance Finch on this most egregious action.
2) As CA038538 supplants the earlier Orders listed by Cullen hence his Order is redundant.
3) The notion that the onus is on this party to show that court actions have been ‘patently unreasonable’ through the judicial review process as noted by Cullen is exactly what CA08538 was all about but was denied filing by the Vancouver Supreme Court Registry. Why have judges under these circumstances to do anything if the civil servants may run the show?
4) Why is this Order and accompanying letter coming from a second Associate Chief Justice rather than from Chief Justice Robert Baumann of the B.C. Supreme Court? (Is he on holidays leaving some civil servant to collar an unsuspecting justice for his nefarious purposes?)
5) Number 1. is much the same as the earlier MacKenzie Order with this clear addition: …any way connected with the subject matter…or arising from or related to that subject matter.’
6) It would appear in some disingenuous way or other that Cullen’s Order would seek to obliterate any recognition of the challenge to the ‘MacKenzie Creed’ as seen in the Appeal Court (Supreme Court) of B.C., the Federal Court of Canada, The Superior Court of Ontario (Ottawa) currently under Appeal in the Divisional Court, and entries pending to the Supreme Court of Canada.
7) Hence Justice Cullen, in the above regard, has not only perverted the course of justice in the B.C. Supreme Court, he has usurped the course of Justice in Canada as I submit his Order well exceeds his authority.
8) How can Cullen expel this plaintiff from an incomplete judicial action which the courts at one time ordered back to further adjudication in line with the legal precept that ‘there can be no process without judgment’. The oft quoted Justice Estey in St. Anne Nackawic pinpoints this difficulty: ‘What must be avoided at all costs is a fundamental deprivation of justice under the law’. That aberration is what Cullen would sanction and should qualify as ‘patently unreasonable’. Of course his Order is structured like that of MacKenzie so that no such appeal may be conducted against their Orders.
9) What if, at some future date, the Union decides to pursue this case? In an accompanying letter, Cullen adds, ‘No further proceedings arising out of or pertaining to the 1985 termination of your employment with the West Vancouver School District will be permitted to be brought in this Court. That is patently unreasonable under the circumstances.
10) For unexplained reasons, Cullen would seek to finalize any future proceedings as the phrase ‘with permission of the court’ (MacKenzie Creed) has been eliminated.Hence my constitutional rights have been abrogated by this Cullen Order in this unresolved labour case where no compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid.
11) ‘Your prior application before Justice Smith for leave to commence a further proceeding was characterized as futile and vexatious and resulted in an order for special costs being made against you.’ Who wrote this? Who is Justice Smith? Do you mean Justice Maranger of Ontario Superior Court #12-54944 Nov. 1-2012 whose Decision is under Appeal in Divisional Court (Ottawa)? That Account was settled for the going rate of 1/6 the Employer’s request which was labeled as being exorbitant by Maranger. Excluding those facts, it needs be noted, would undermine the salacious appeal of Cullen’s line who would appear to be acting as an agent for the Defendant. That’s not justice; it’s anarchy.
12) ‘You must accept the finality of this outcome’. (Cullen) Does that mean the Minister of Justice, Peter MacKay,must accept your statement as well?
13) Without media coverage, it would seem that the Judicial System of Canada is getting away with the hoax of the century much to the detriment of Canada and 34 million Canadians. Where’s the media?
Through systematic injustice, the de facto legal labour situation in Canada based on this case is that an employer may avoid all fiduciary obligations by hiding dismissals behind lay-offs. I call it The West Vancouver School Board Final Solution (‘If you do not sign a $1 settlement agreement, you will not get your pension.’)
Roger Callow aka ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ www.employeescasecanada.com
encl. 35 page unacknowledged B.C. Appeal Court ‘Surety’ Appeal (fee paid) to MacKay plus 2 pge Cullen Order
cc B.C. Attorney General Suzanne Anton
SCofC Hon. R. Wagner