Incoming Minister of Justice (Canada)
TO: Incoming Minister of Justice (Canada) - also included in SK Queen's Bench case: Callow vs West Vancouver School Trustees
To whom it may concern;
1) Now that the election writ has fallen, there is no incumbent Minister of Justice until one is appointed after the October 19 Federal election.
2) No matter which Party forms the government, you are on your own as none of the Party leaders (Gang of 4: Harper/Mulcair/Trudeau/May) even acknowledged the 30 year unresolved employeescasecanada.com where no compensation has been paid in an illicit senior teacher lay-off in 1985 under the 'ultra vires' (my claim) of the imposed BILL 35. Canada has been reduced to Third World status as one consequence of that failure in this major national issue.
3) So perhaps you may wish to think twice before taking the oath of Office as Canada has added to the civil/criminal judicial roster with a third entity; political affairs. As one consequence, I have suggested that on the first day of law classes, this case should be required reading so that on the second day, the professor may continue with the remaining 50% of students. PLACARD: NO ETHICAL STUDENT WILL TAKE UP THE PRACTICE OF LAW IN CANADA
4) A word here should be noted about the PLACARD signs which have adorned my continuous 11 year public protest near Parliament Hill in Ottawa which have been studiously avoided by the anti-employee media. These Placards have formed part of the Employer's factum as outside evidence of my perfidy which has been used to declare a frivolous and vexatious label in driving this case out of courts of law.
Hence expect to see inclusions on this level in this tome.
5) The following rather rambling account relates matters relating to this case and to the conduct of the Justice System in general.
QUOTES: One from Canada (Lac Majentic rail disaster 2014) and one from the U.S.A. as Canada appears to lack the expertise for hard-hitting accounts)
6) '...if you take any one of those factors out of the equation, there may not have been an accident...Each time Transport Canada inspectors were saying, O.K. we found this, you've got to do this; but nobody was looking at it from a big picture point of view to say "Have we got a systematic problem? This is the question for the judicial system...our mission is to try and prevent another accident from happening, and in order to do that we have to drill down deeply and look at all the systematic (my underlining RC) issues.
My Commentary: In June of 1958, the under construction Second Narrows Bridge fell killing 19 painters including one student's father from my high school. A neighbor was on a pleasure boat beneath the bridge at the time and fished bodies out of the water. The problem according to my father with extensive experience in the steel business? Using bolts for a first time rather than rivets which permitted more leeway in each drilled hole. Hence on a hot afternoon with expansion factors, the bridge extended until it collapsed. My father's point was that, in the old days, an old-timer was always assigned to oversee a project to look for systematic weaknesses. They were respected in their time but the new generation of specialists marched to their own drummer. In the unelected PMO which is accountable to no-one, political hacks seem to be the oversight people making a complete hash of matters which explains why I don't vote as elections at most merely replace one body of unaccountable 300 factotums with another 300 clueless souls. However, it makes for good work for the legal fraternity. In the Employee's Case, I have encountered Attorney Generals from B.C. and Ontario plus the Federal Government to be 'less than competent in their jobs' with this case. The Governor General, a titular role but one with some powers, appears to be reduced to handing out medals. Truly it may be said that Canadians are badly led.
7) Washington, D.C.'s commentator, Jack Cafferty
'It's Getting Ugly Out There'
'...the nonsense that flies out of your mouth during your broadcasts.' Bill
'Well, Bill, let me put it to you this way: the bottom line is that the country and the Constitution either stand for something or they don't. The ends don't justify the means - ever. You are either a nation of laws and you conduct yourself accordingly, or you are not, in which case you can wipe your ass with the Constitution when it's convenient. But you can't pay lip service to these bedrock values and then not live up to them. That makes us no better than any other two-bit government on the face of the earth...We're in the fight of our lives, and many of us don't even know it ...That said, I think the process of corruption or contamination of the media is sinister and subtle...The bottom line is that our government no longer works for us ...What would slow the decline and maybe help reverse it? The American people have to get pissed off enough to start changing it...Why we don't vote much. We're never told the truth. Certainly not by the politicians, and less and less by the sad wreck we call the media.'
My Commentary: Amen, brother . Editor Andrew Potter's Ottawa Citizen owes me a front page apology c/w my web site photo and my 'Titanic Cap' labeled 'Our Courts'
The Employee's Case (Canada)
8) Your first act of Office should be to remove Supreme Court of Canada's Chief Justice, Beverley MacLachlin for dereliction of duty. PLACARD: IMPEACH SCOFC B. MACLACHLIN. This request stems not only from her role in 1999 when, along with then Chief Justice Antonio Lamers (d.) and Cory j.; she rejected the first hearing on the universality of unions question; a vital question for anyone holding Union membership for, in effect, the sweetheart deal was now entrenched in law based on faulty information. In 2004, as Chief Justice, she oversaw a Second rejection under the ultimate remedy label which is the cornerstone of not only the collective bargaining system but for contracts in general. That's when Canada sank to Third World status. The final perfidy justifying her dismissal is that as President of the oversight body, the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC), there have been no acknowledgments for over a year now of serious transgressions by individual judges. She has brought the course of Justice into serious disrepute.
9) Your second act of Office relates to suspending Federal Court's Chief Justice Paul Crampton for permitting on two occasions, Vancouver Prothonotary, Roger Lafreniére to 'jump the gun' and in secret hearings to dispose of my cases on trivial grounds. As Crampton c.j. fully realized, these hearings were to proceed in Ottawa before a judge. It is hoped his replacement will see fit to get T-2360-14 alleging fraud on both the part of the original conspirators and the consequent judicial processes back on track. It should be noted here that Lafreniére was listed in those fraud charges from his first foray hence he should never have been permitted to pull a similar stunt the second time.
10) There are a number of other judges whom have acted egregiously as detailed in submissions to the CJC. Hopefully a new appointment there will see to dealing with the problems.
11) This general account is from a perspective of viewing 9 separate court systems stretching across Canada with observations accompanied, in some instances, by suggestions.
12) Bless those Registry clerks whom seek to ease filing procedures, for without them, the system would grind to a halt. Unfortunately, that appears to be the case with Appeal Court Registries which seek to derail Appeals.
13) That bold latter assertion is similar to an individual complainant seeking to challenge actor Bill Cosby in a 'he said/she said' environment. However, with many complainants coming forward with essentially the same charge, a different picture is painted. In the Employee's Case, I have not met an Appeal Court Registry - and there are many- which has not sought to derail my appeals; no doubt under the influence of senior personnel. SCofC Registrar, Roger Bilodeau, is a case in point although one would not know it from his 'smooth' letters. Hence the following description applies to the lower courts.
14) Included in this account is a 2-page letter from Jennifer Fabian, Registrar of Court of Queen's Bench in Regina, SK dated July 28-2015 outlining the additional steps to be taken which she does in some detail before my case may be filed. (Courts outside of B.C. have been selected in this unresolved legal case due to this litigant being expelled from B.C. Courts for 'reasons best known to a judge'.) That is the best supportive Registry account that I have received. She quotes no law as should be the case as Registry officials are not lawyers.
15) Standard procedure for many Registry Officials is to reject a submission without explanation with the usual advice to a non-represented litigant...'See a lawyer'. On one occasion, I shot back...'He wants to know too'. Even lawyers require the assistance of the Registry as interpretation of the rules as to what applies and what is ignored is required. But then, lawyers charge their clients for second trips to the court or Registry in what I claim is a billable time racket.
16) Fortunately, there are those clerks who ease the pain:
a) One Registry clerk claimed the rules are merely suggestions which, while being an unorthodox statement, is a sane approach to the problem
b) Another clerk provided me with the copy of a filed action as a template for my own.
c) as Minister of Justice, you could greatly assist Registry matters by providing a non-binding recommendation sheet for litigants in all courts of law which would greatly lighten the load and subsequent frustration on the part of Registry officials whom appear to be in a high stress job. Litigants would also be greatly relieved.
17) To be diplomatic, the salaries of the Federal Court should be increased to match their provincial counterparts. As it is, some judges use the Federal Court as a back door to future provincial appointments. Ontario Superior Court judges Colin MacKinnon (13-59060-April 10 2014 H.D.) and Robert Scott (14-61592 May 14 2014 H.D.)who conspired against me with the help of the Employer's Ottawa legal arm, were originally Federal Court appointees bringing them under CJC scrutiny rather than the Ontario Judicial Council. That caper cost the Employer their Hicks, Morley LLP et al representation with little likelihood of the Employer being able to acquire capable representation in Ontario.
18) The Ontario Appeal Court of Chief Justice George Strathy has been highly problematic although I cannot argue with their rejection of the Scott j. Decision for Appeal in that he didn't make one leaving this case in limbo with the bottom line that the MacKinnon frivolous and vexatious Order remains on the Judicial Record. In the Scott Appeal, I detailed my rejection of the MacKinnon Order which I saw for a first time with his Order in which he appeared to use court facilities in creating the necessary history for such a charge (as opposed to relying on the Employer's account as he should have = collusion on a high level)
19) The focus of 13-59060 by the Employer as plaintiff was to request a discussion of all issues with an oral claim that the Employer was not going to pay compensation in a 29 year case. That part of the issue was ignored by MacKinnon j. and forms a key aspect in the SK version of events for if the Employer does not indeed owe any compensation to this employee, what purpose is there for any of these court cases filed over the past 30 years by me? In brief, the SK courts must establish whether or not the Employer owes compensation, in whatever amount, in this labour case whether it is under the collective bargaining rules, as the B.C. Courts would assert, or under the law of contract as the Employer would assert quoting BILL 35 regulations. The constitutional question relates to whether imposed government legislation (BILL 35 since withdrawn by the B.C. government) is able to supplant such as the collective bargaining rules in a substantial way. Current PSAC negotiations with the Federal Government over sick day leave is a current issue reflecting this problem as well.
20) As to individual court appearances which I have been permitted to make, a generalization would be that the Decision is made before the judge(s) has walked into the courtroom (political trial) with a level of judicial trickery unequaled in the annals of Canadian jurisprudence I am sure for any litigant. Dismissing judges under these circumstances is the only answer. (Dealing with 'praetorian guard' Appeal Court Registries is more problematical.) Unfortunately, the oversight bodies appear more concerned about corralling those judges and lawyers who would 'undermine the course of justice'; namely, speaking the naked truth. The Judge Lori Douglas trial in Manitoba comes to mind which was shuffled under the carpet when she resigned. I am not 'resigning' in any such fashion.
21) I will be adding to this account as matters develop. At this time, 550-1700-8208-157 June 8-2015 H.D. Gatineau, Que. 'decision pending' is already highly irregular and threatens to implode the Quebec Justice System paralleling failures in B.C. and Ontario.
The Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Justice System (Roger Callow)
cc Governor General
Federal Court Chief Justice Paul Crampton
SCof C Hon. R. Wagner
Que: Premier Couillard/BLOC/Parti Quebecois
SK: Premier Brad Wall (plus inclusion in refiled action)
Canadian Judicial Council
no copy is being sent to the 'Gang of 4' (Harper/Mulcair/Trudeau/May) nor is any copy included to Premiers B.C. Christie Clark and Ontario Kathleen Wynne governments whose governments have failed completely as a consequence of this issue.