Thursday, April 29, 2010
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
A Day in the Life of Norman Spector
5:30 AM Arose and had coffee with morning newspapers, the New York Times delivered by Kindle. Coffee was usual latte made from green beans hand-picked by Guatemala refugees in the highlands of Colombia, slowly roasted over a Saltspring Island sheep-dung fire. It tastes like shit.
6:37 AM Review all writings of Benjamin Disraeli, Edmund Burke, and Winston Churchill on parliamentary decmocracy. Decide it’s all a threat to national security and redact everything.
7:00 AM Review Speakers’s decision regarding supremacy of parliament. Redact everything. The speaker’s just this guy, you know?
7:15 Send considered opinion to Globe and Mail.
7:18 Walk dog.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
The man from Niagara Falls grasps straws
I was drinking alone in the bar of the Chateau Laurier, after watching the Speaker of the House, Peter Milliken, deliver a fabulous precedent-setting ruling regarding the supremacy of Parliament over the executive. In my view as a constitutional lawyer, it was game, set, match.
Meanwhile, I had failed to get information from the Department of National Defence regarding information on prisoners taken by Canadian troops in Afghanistan, even though Deep Frog had pointed me in the right direction, and I was pondering the means of holding the Attorney-General of Canada responsible for obstruction of justice, exactly as the Man in Stripes from the CBC had commissioned me to do, offering the tantalizing possibilities of Leafs tickets for the playoffs.
I had resorted to history. The difficulty of prosecuting an obstruction of justice allegation against the Attorney-General is that the Department of Justice, which is answerable to the Attorney-General, has to take on the case, which is like investigating your boss.
Meanwhile back at the Department of Justice:
Purpose
2. (1) The purpose of this Act is to extend the present laws of Canada to provide a right of access to information in records under the control of a government institution in accordance with the principles that government information should be available to the public, that necessary exceptions to the right of access should be limited and specific and that decisions on the disclosure of government information should be reviewed independently of government.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Let's impeach Rob Nicholson. I'm only saying....
This arbitrary power is not to be had by conquest. Nor can any sovereign have it by succession; for no man can succeed to fraud, rapine, and violence. Those who give and those who receive arbitrary power are alike criminal; and there is no man but is bound to resist it to the best of his power, wherever it shall show its face to the world.
Law and arbitrary power are in eternal enmity. Name me a magistrate, and I will name property; name me power, and I will name protection. It is a contradiction in terms, it is blasphemy in religion, it is wickedness in politics, to say that any man can have arbitrary power. In every patent of office the duty is included. For what else does a magistrate exist? To suppose for power, is an absurdity in idea. Judges are guided and governed by the eternal laws of justice, to which we are all subject. We may bite our chains, if we will; but we shall be made to know ourselves, and be taught that man is born to be governed by law; and he that will substitute will in the place of it is an enemy to God.
Edmund Burke, at the trial of Warren Hastings
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Document dump bear addendum
The following is Article 139 from the Criminal Code of Canada (emphasis added):
139. (1) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding,
(a) by indemnifying or agreeing to indemnify a surety, in any way and either in whole or in part, or
(b) where he is a surety, by accepting or agreeing to accept a fee or any form of indemnity whether in whole or in part from or in respect of a person who is released or is to be released from custody,
is guilty of
(c) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or
(d) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Idem
(2) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner other than a manner described in subsection (1) to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.
Idem
(3) Without restricting the generality of subsection (2), every one shall be deemed wilfully to attempt to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice who in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed,
(a) dissuades or attempts to dissuade a person by threats, bribes or other corrupt means from giving evidence;
(b) influences or attempts to influence by threats, bribes or other corrupt means a person in his conduct as a juror; or
(c) accepts or obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain a bribe or other corrupt consideration to abstain from giving evidence, or to do or to refrain from doing anything as a juror.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 127; R.S., c. 2(2nd Supp.), s. 3; 1972, c. 13, s. 8.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Help Wanted
Friday, April 16, 2010
Harper Grounded by Mount Doom
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Browsings of a document dump bear [links fixed]
"The major problem is quite simply one of grammar, and the main work to consult in this matter is Dr. Dan Streetmentioner's Time Traveller's Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations. It will tell you for instance how to describe something that was about to happen to you in the past before you avoided it by time-jumping forward two days in order to avoid it. The event will be described differently according to whether you are talking about it from the standpoint of your own natural time, from a time in the further future, or a time in the further past and is further complicated by the possibility of conducting conversations whilst you are actually travelling from one time to another with the intention of becoming your own father or mother." Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
So, OK, the reason for this blog is, as advertised, “the story of an attempt to extract public information from the Department of National Defence.” The information sought was and is concrete evidence that Canada is complying with its obligations under International Humanitarian Law, particularly the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, and the reason I care being that millions of people died in the last two “World Wars”, and my Uncle Wilfred left me his Military Medal from World War 1 – specifically to me, he didn’t leave me anything else – and I have assumed that means he left me the Medal in trust, so that other kids don’t have to live through what he did. And of course, millions of people didn’t live through it. And kids are still getting killed.
All of that caused me to apply for information, through our excellent Access to Information Act, which in turn led to nine months’ delay, after which I received 73 almost totally redacted pages – exactly as the current Information Commissioner decried – after which I appealed to the previous Information Commissioner, which caused a further six months’ delay, following which I received a FOAD letter from said Commissioner, following which I applied for a judicial review in the Federal Court of Canada.
At that point, I thought maybe I should just wind up the blog, I’d done everything I could do. And yet….something wouldn’t let me go. I felt the government had tried to snow me, and therefore my Uncle Wilfred, and in my eyes – even worse – the Federal Court of Canada in the person of Chief Justice Allan Lutfy who showed me great consideration as a “lay litigant,” and who, after all that, I had seriously aggravated by almost forcing sudden death overtime with the Department of Justice. I mean, Crosby is Captain
I was therefore equally fascinated to review the CBC “document dump” administered by the fabulous CBC Politics crew, particularly but not only, SuperBerry O’Malley, and I thought I had, as a result, a “Gotcha” moment. The reason for that is as follows. The ATIP response I received from the DND was the aforementioned almost entirely redacted 73 pages of military gibberish. At the hearing in Vancouver on April 20, 2009, I received a document “CAMPAIGN AGAINST TERRORISM DETAINEE TRANSFER LOG” which was almost exactly the document I had requested in December, 2006, but didn't know existed.
I thought…perfect… my Access to Information Act request had worked. Subsequently, after the hearing, I found out that this document was in the public domain as of November 2007, having been posted by Professor Amir Attaran of the University of Ottawa, and being the response of DFAIT to his Access to Information Act request, which, as it turns out, was subsequent to mine. One of the differences was, of course, I was dealing with the Department of National Defence which has a history. Or maybe it was just me. Whatever.
So in fact, the result of the hearing was that I got information that was already in the public domain, but that was fine, we were getting somewhere.
Then, with the whole Afghan documents thing in Parliament and the Canadian Military Police Complaints Commission proceeding relentlessly down the path of open government that I, a die-hard Canadian citizen, thought I knew and loved, the government released a mass of documents – an obvious snowstorm – which the CBC nevertheless organized and placed on the web in an accessible form.
So far, so hoopy.
I, as a concerned Canadian citizen, with more than a passing interest in the whole affair, browsed among said documents, and discovered what I thought was the smoking gun.
So the crucial thing is, she stood up in Federal Court and said the following:
I took this as a good faith assertion – which I still believe it to be – that her client, the Department of National Defence, had led her to believe that the only documents that existed concerning Canadian prisoners in Afghanistan during Operation Medusa in September, 2006, were the 73 redacted and useless pages that Justice Lutfy assured me contained no information related to my request that had not already been revealed.
I could believe it. And yet…it bugged me. Here we have the…log, kept meticulously for four years from 2002 to April 2006 and it just ceased to exist? Some time ago, I decided that this was possible, even if highly unethical and almost certainly illegal.
Then, then, dear readers, I browsed the CBC document dump and discovered the following:
The next seven pages are exactly the same, although numbered consecutively pages 1-10 as a DFAIT document, EV.DFAIT.0002 .0 180.
Then, bells began to ring dimly in my addled mind. Wait, I thought, maybe these documents already exist in the public domain in Amir Attaran’s document dump of November 14, 2007.
And indeed they do. I submit that these documents, overlooked by me but freely available in the public domain, make clear that Canada did indeed keep track of prisoners taken in Afghanistan, and that such a summary existed until at least May, 2007 – contrary to the statement in open court by counsel for the Department of National Defence – and that that document took up at least 10 pages, the first forty prisoners having taken up a page and a bit, which works out to - at 30 lines per page - 300 prisoners as of May 2007. And the documents exist. There can be no doubt of what’s under the redacted 10 pages: the DFAIT document number - EV.DFAIT.0002 .0 180 - is the same for all 10 pages, the date of release is the same, and it occurs in the document between two emails that refer to it as such. What else could it be? The floor plan of the Canadian Ambassador’s residence in
This little problem – misleading justice – seems endemic to the culture at National Defence Headquarters, as revealed in the Somalia Inquiry, but not in
Monday, April 12, 2010
The Great Train Wreck
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
truth will come to light
Excerpt from the Third Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949
Chapter II. Quarters, Food and Clothing of Prisoners of War
Art 25. Prisoners of war shall be quartered under conditions as favourable as those for the forces of the Detaining Power who are billeted in the same area. The said conditions shall make allowance for the habits and customs of the prisoners and shall in no case be prejudicial to their health.
The foregoing provisions shall apply in particular to the dormitories of prisoners of war as regards both total surface and minimum cubic space, and the general installations, bedding and blankets.
The premises provided for the use of prisoners of war individually or collectively, shall be entirely protected from dampness and adequately heated and lighted, in particular between dusk and lights out. All precautions must be taken against the danger of fire.
In any camps in which women prisoners of war, as well as men, are accommodated, separate dormitories shall be provided for them.
Monday, April 5, 2010
DON AS GOVERNOR-GENERAL
RON MACLEAN
Welcome back to House of Commons Night in Canada after the Easter long weekend. I'm Ron MacLean here with Don Cherry. Grapes, I know you've got a lot to talk about, at the end of the regular season...
DON CHERRY
Absolutely....
RON MACLEAN
DON CHERRY
So Kiprusoff just couldn't stone Chicago. In my books, he's still the best goalie in the universe but you can't win a game all on your own. Next year.....NEXT YEAR... the Flames will be back in contention because of this guy.
RON MACLEAN
Yeah but we're pressed for time, as usual, and we have to get to the Governor-General rumours...
DON CHERRY
What's wrong with Michelle Gene? She's already the Governor-General, and like I said before, she shoulda been the one handing out Olympic medals rather than Dick Pound...
RON MACLEAN
Yeah, we've been here before, but the fact is, the Prime Minister is looking for a new Governor-General, and your name has been floated as a hot candidate.
DON CHERRY
Look, I'm honoured to be considered. But I've already got a job.
RON MACLEAN
You don't want to move into Rideau Hall?
DON CHERRY
Well, Blue might like it. There's a lotta trees. Now that I think about it, could I have a backyard rink?
RON MACLEAN
I don't see why not...
DON CHERRY
And can I still do Coach's Corner?
RON MACLEAN
You'd have to ask the Prime Minister, but why not? Rideau Hall might need a bigger beer fridge.
DON CHERRY
I don't see that as a problem.
RON MACLEAN
Me either...
DON CHERRY
But in this day and age, you gotta speak both official languages...
RON MACLEAN
You used to play in Three Rivers...
DON CHERRY
Yeah, but that was different. I did my talking on the ice: it's the same in English and French.
RON MACLEAN
So if not you, then who?
DON CHERRY
I think Hayley Wickenheiser is the obvious candidate. She's a woman, she's a hockey player, she's a Gold Medal winner, and she probably speaks all five official languages.
RON MACLEAN
I didn't know there were five...
DON CHERRY
At least five. I'm sure one of them is Ukrainian. Isn't Hayley from Saskatchewan?
RON MACLEAN
I'm not sure we want to go there...
DON CHERRY
You don't want to go to Saskatchewan?!
RON MACLEAN
I didn't exactly say that...
DON CHERRY
Or why not Gordie Howe? He's in as good a shape as I am, and he can skate better.
RON MACLEAN
So that's it for House of Commons Night in Canada...
DON CHERRY
Does Rideau Hall have a pool table?
RON MACLEAN
If it doesn't, you could install one.
DON CHERRY
You know, I'm starting to warm up to the idea.
RON MACLEAN
You'll have to inspect the Governor-General's Horse Guards. Will you wear sunglasses?
DON CHERRY
Hey, is the Pope Catholic?
RON MACLEAN
Let's not go there.
DON CHERRY
Why, is the Pope in Saskatchewan?
Thursday, April 1, 2010
[redactio ad absurdum]
A guttering candle burned low in the cubicle of Sergeant-Major X. It was 2 AM at National Defence Headquarters. No end was in sight.
Sergeant-Major X regarded the candle grimly. He had volunteered his services to the Canadian Forces after retirement, thinking perhaps of a job at Vimy Ridge, explaining the battle in both official languages. Failing that, he imagined counselling returning soldiers traumatized by battlefield experiences, or even recruiting volunteers by describing the importance, and indeed honour, or serving in the Canadian military.
Instead, he'd been installed in this cubicle - the Black Hole of Ottawa - and asked , ordered, whatever, to remove "sensitive" material from thousands of pages of DND documents relating to Afghanistan. It was an ambiguous assignment - he was starting to think deliberately so. He'd seen it before at the Somalia Inquiry. So far, nobody had suggested shredding anything, but it was only a matter of time, he thought.
A large pile of unredacted documents was to his left, a smaller pile of redacted documents to his right.
He had started with a fountain pen and a bottle of India ink. Then, he'd used Sharpies, modified by filing them down to a blunt edge that could obliterate two lines at a time. Then he'd gone to Canadian Tire for paint rollers and tins of Midnight Black.
For guidance, he had Section 15 of the Access to Information Act:
International affairs and defence
15. (1) The head of a government institution may refuse to disclose any record requested under this Act that contains information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to be injurious to the conduct of international affairs, the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada or the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, any such information
(a) relating to military tactics or strategy, or relating to military exercises or operations undertaken in preparation for hostilities or in connection with the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities;
(b) relating to the quantity, characteristics, capabilities or deployment of weapons or other defence equipment or of anything being designed, developed, produced or considered for use as weapons or other defence equipment;
(c) relating to the characteristics, capabilities, performance, potential, deployment, functions or role of any defence establishment, of any military force, unit or personnel or of any organization or person responsible for the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities;
(d) obtained or prepared for the purpose of intelligence relating to
(i) the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada, or
(ii) the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities;
(e) obtained or prepared for the purpose of intelligence respecting foreign states, international organizations of states or citizens of foreign states used by the Government of Canada in the process of deliberation and consultation or in the conduct of international affairs;
(f) on methods of, and scientific or technical equipment for, collecting, assessing or handling information referred to in paragraph (d) or (e) or on sources of such information;
(g) on the positions adopted or to be adopted by the Government of Canada, governments of foreign states or international organizations of states for the purpose of present or future international negotiations;
(h) that constitutes diplomatic correspondence exchanged with foreign states or international organizations of states or official correspondence exchanged with Canadian diplomatic missions or consular posts abroad; or
(i) relating to the communications or cryptographic systems of Canada or foreign states used
(i) for the conduct of international affairs,
(ii) for the defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada, or
(iii) in relation to the detection, prevention or suppression of subversive or hostile activities.
Definitions
(2) In this section,
“defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada”
« défense du Canada ou d’États alliés ou associés avec le Canada »
“defence of Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada” includes the efforts of Canada and of foreign states toward the detection, prevention or suppression of activities of any foreign state directed toward actual or potential attack or other acts of aggression against Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada;
“subversive or hostile activities”
« activités hostiles ou subversives »
“subversive or hostile activities” means
(a) espionage against Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada,
(b) sabotage,
(c) activities directed toward the commission of terrorist acts, including hijacking, in or against Canada or foreign states,
(d) activities directed toward accomplishing government change within Canada or foreign states by the use of or the encouragement of the use of force, violence or any criminal means,
(e) activities directed toward gathering information used for intelligence purposes that relates to Canada or any state allied or associated with Canada, and
(f) activities directed toward threatening the safety of Canadians, employees of the Government of Canada or property of the Government of Canada outside Canada.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I “15”.
The night wore on. Sergeant-Major X did his best. Dawn crept slowly to the Ottawa sky. It was done: 8,000 randomly redacted pages. No country could ask for more.