NEWSLETTER

Published : MAY 17, 2021 | Vol. I Issue: 22


Erroneous Upholding of Bill-21 in Hak v. AG of Quebec

PUBLISHED: MAY 17, 2021 | by the Constitutional Rights Centre

Paul Slansky, CRC ~ Operational Co-Director comments on the Quebec Superior Court decision of Justice Blanchard in Hak v. AG of Quebec, 2021 QCCS 1466, being wrongly decided.

Thank you for your continued and kind support of the CRC.

 

(Click image below to read his full commentary)

 

Paul Slansky, Operational Co-Director (Criminal and Quasi-Criminal)


twittermailtwittermailyoutubeyoutube

Published : MAY 12, 2021 | Vol. I Issue: 21


Defending Children’s Rights – Post Press Conference Interview

PUBLISHED: MAY 12, 2021 | by the Constitutional Rights Centre

Watch our video interview with CRC Operational Co-Director, and legal expert (lawyer) in the area of children’s rights.

Amina Sherazee discusses the rights and best interests of the child, including how governments and society at large have completely failed our children.

In fact, it has caused more suffering to them under these emergency measures.

Please watch the Post PRESS CONFERENCE interview video below.

 

Thank you for your continued and kind support of the CRC

 

Rocco Galati, BA, LLB, LLM, Executive Director


twittermailtwittermailyoutubeyoutube

Published : MAY 10, 2021 | Vol. I Issue: 20


Defending Children’s Rights – School Court Application

PUBLISHED: MAY 10, 2021 | by the Constitutional Rights Centre

Please watch our press conference of May 6th, 2020, setting out our school application against the school lockdowns and other measures.

The Application was filed April 20th, 2021.
See the notice of application on our website.

The lawyers for the Attorney General have asked the Court to summarily dismiss the Application without any hearing under Rule 2.1.01(1) of the Rules.

They had done the same thing with the Police Officer’s Application.

However, the Court on May 5th, 2021, DENIED the government lawyers’ request in the Police application. See the court order on our website.

Please watch the PRESS CONFERENCE video below.

Thank you for your continued and kind support of the CRC

 

Rocco Galati, BA, LLB, LLM, Executive Director


twittermailtwittermailyoutubeyoutube

Published : MAY 4, 2021 | Vol. I Issue: 19


Police take Court Action against Ontario Government over COVID Measures Enforcement Duties

PUBLISHED: MAY 4, 2021 | by the Constitutional Rights Centre

This is the press conference of the application by police officers filed with the Superior Court to clarify their duties, discretion and obligations under the COVID Measures.

The day after we served the Notice of Application, lawyers for the Attorney General wrote a letter to the Court, for the Court to issue an order to show cause as to why the Court should not dismiss the case, on the “Court’s own motion”, for being a “frivolous, vexatious and abusive” case, pursuant to Rule 2.1.

The Crown lawyers do not provide a basis as to why it is so we can respond, but if an order is issued, we are allotted 10 pages maximum, to disprove that it is not “frivolous, vexatious and abusive”, without the benefit of reference to evidence not yet filed.

Their Notice of Application can be viewed on the Constitutional Rights Centre website at: constitutionalrightscentre.ca

 

Please watch the PRESS CONFERENCE video below.

Thank you for your continued and kind support of the CRC

 

 

Rocco Galati, BA, LLB, LLM, Executive Director


twittermailtwittermailyoutubeyoutube

Published : APR 29 , 2021 | Vol. I Issue: 18


Police take Court Action against Ontario Government over COVID Measures Enforcement Duties

PUBLISHED: APRIL 29, 2021 | by the Constitutional Rights Centre

– PRESS RELEASE –

Ten (10) active, and five (5) retired, Police officers have launched an Application in Ontario Superior Court, to seek clarification, and challenge, the Province’s Covid-measures, and their enforcement, as breaching and violating their Police Oath which Oath includes upholding the Constitution.

Their Notice of Application can be viewed on the Constitutional Rights Centre website at: constitutionalrightscentre.ca

Some of the Applicants will hold a brief press conference, along with their legal counsel, on: Thursday, April 29th at 4:30 p.m. EST

You can join in at: www.wholeheartedmedia.ca

Any questions may be directed to legal counsel at: Rocco Galati

Rocco Galati Law Firm Professional Corporation
Tel: (416) 530-9864
Email: rocco@idirect.com

Thank you for your continued and kind support of the CRC

 

Rocco Galati, BA, LLB, LLM, Executive Director


twittermailtwittermailyoutubeyoutube

Published : MAR 15 , 2021 | Vol. I Issue: 17


The Role of the Monarchy in Canada in 2021

PUBLISHED: MARCH 15, 2021 | by the Constitutional Rights Centre

 

Over the last week, in response to the interview of Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, there has been discussion in the press (CBC (the Current) and Global News) about the difficulties that Canada might face if there were to be an attempt to cut ties with the Monarchy. This debate misses an important point. There are no longer any ties to the Monarchy.

Canada no longer is a Monarchy. Since Patriation, it is a Republic based on a Constitutional Monarchy system. There is no need to cut ties with the Monarchy as Patriation in the Canada Act (UK) and the Constitution Act, 1982 have already cut those ties.

The Patriation of the Canadian Constitution 1982 precludes any action by the UK in Canadian legal affairs. While the Queen could have taken the position that she still was the head of state, not as the Queen of England, but as the Queen of Canada, this option was foreclosed by the decision of the Queen, shortly after the Patriation, to refuse a petition from First Nations bands, under the treaties signed with the Crown, on the basis that she no longer had ANY authority in respect of Canada.

As a matter of practice, for decades, the Governor General (“GG”) has been the effective head of state of Canada. The Queen has not acted in respect of Canada through the GG for decades.

The CRC argued in the Supreme Court Act Reference (Nadon Reference) that the Patriation and the amending formula of the Constitution Act, 1982 precluded Parliament from changing parts of the Supreme Court Act, previously an ordinary statute, that purported to change the composition of the Supreme Court of Canada. The SCC agreed and ruled that the constitutional amending formula precluded changing the composition of the SCC without constitutional amendment. This constitutionalized the composition of the SCC, precluding unilateral changes by Parliament.

The same logic applies to the GG. As the CRC argued in the Citizenship Act case in the FCC (Bill C-24), although the Court did not address this issue, the GG’s role and powers are also protected by the Constitution Act, 1982 amending formula. Parliament, the UK and the Queen cannot change the role or powers of the GG without constitutional amendment. The powers of the GG are set out in Letters Patent issued by the Monarchy in the UK. The last one prior to Patriation was in 1947. The CRC asserts that the precedent and logic of the Supreme Court Act Reference makes it clear that the Patriation and amending formula of the Constitution Act, 1982 have constitutionalized the role and powers of the GG as set out in the Letters Patent, 1947.

The GG is no longer subject to directions from or control by the Monarchy since the Monarchy no longer has any legal authority in Canada. The GG, who was, in effect, the head of state, is now legally the head of state.

The ties of Monarchy that bound need not be cut. The ties have already been cut by the UK in the Patriation of the Constitution achieved by the UK Parliament passing and the Queen signing into law, the Canada Act. Many do not realize the implications of Patriation. We are free from the Monarchy. Long live the Republic of Canada!

Thank you for your continued and kind support of the CRC

 

Paul Slansky, Operational Director (Criminal and Quasi-Criminal)


twittermailtwittermailyoutubeyoutube