Why do this now? Why not months ago, when the issue first came to light? Since when does the government have to outsource the determination of which information is suitable for release and which isn't? The fact it hasn't released unredacted versions of the documents indicates it clearly has opinions on the matter. Opposition complaints that the government is merely trying to stall seem perfectly credible, and it would fit a pattern: This government is even slower and more miserly in disclosing information about its operations than its predecessors.
See: http://tinyurl.com/ya8hv4m
13 comments:
They only went to a retired judge because they knew that if they asked for a ruling from the actual SC they would get a quick answer that they didn't like. We now have a scandal as big, perhaps bigger, than Watergate. It is time for all three opposition parties to stand up on Monday and instruct the Sergeant at Arms to obtain the documents and then hold the Government in contempt.
It is time to get off the pot.
Hoping for a bombshell eh?
Maybe there is or maybe there isn't. Certainly any findings will conclude that the decision not to hand prisoners over to the Americans was both political and would llikely increase the chances of "abuse" or torture.
Iggy's own musings about torure are rather unpalatable as well.
I think that if the events get too hot for the gov't to handle they will do what their predecessors did. That is shut the whole thing down.The other option is to call an election.
As has already been stated Lib MPs are already on record as saying that Harper has committed war crimes. No result will be satisfactory to them.
Perhaps the Harper Govt has the good sense to try and keep the issue contained until our troops are out of harms way in Afghanistan.
One year, I'm sure Liberals can wait one more year on this 3 years old story, to demoralize our troops further.
Judge Iacobucci must be convinced this is the right way to go.
Listen folks, this now has nothing to do with the Afghan issue, it is a matter of protecting our constitution. The House has the absolute right issue such orders and if we let the Government deny this right we might as well burn our constitution and forget democracy. Even Rob Nicholson knows this if you read his reactions carefully it is clear that he understands the power of the house to have its orders followed.
And by the way Wilson I wish you people would stop trying to avoid responsibility by waving the flag and trying to invoke the "troops" to ignore what is morally and legally right. The Constitution of the Land supersedes anyone's morale including yours, mine, or anyone of the troops. You are dinosaur and we left these xenophobic arguments back in the days of Vietnam. Grow up.
kirby
You are just as bad if not worse than wilson. You accuse him of flag waving and invoking the troops etc.,meanwhile you pretend this is about the constitution! What bloody rubbish.This is about gotcha politics.
The tricky part here for the Libs is to try and protect the previous gov't while trying to make it stick to the current one.
The constitution has a lot of problems. If you want to fix it them say so. The irony is that even suggesting to fix it would lead to a constitutional crisis.Welcome to Canada...
I hope that the Liberals do not sit by and wait for Iacobucci's report.
No Anonymous, and I don't hide behind an "anonymity" like you are doing. I don't care what it is about for the Liberal Party, for me it is about the constitution. Hundreds of years of the British Constitution and then the BNA make it very clear what the powers of the House are. And you ignore those powers at your, and all of our, peril. And you know as well as I do that if it was the Liberal Party ignoring the constitution of the Land we hear no end of it from you and the rest of the Tories.
IT IS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION! If the documents show nothing untoward, fine, I have not problem with that. But an order of the House must be obeyed or we have abandoned the rule of law.
You WANT it to be about partisan games, and it might be for some people. BUT NOT FOR ME. Obey the constitution or move to a country where they don't have one.
The Constitution as provides that Parliament is not above the law, the supreme court is the final word, not Parliament.
There are many laws, written and unwritten, involved in this issue, and complicated further by the fact we are at war.
For example, no info collected from other Governments and arms length agencies (Red Cross) can be disclosed. period.
The Opps are asking the Govt to cross that line, saying Parliament over rules.....
I believe that in the British Parliamentary system the Orders of the House are in fact above the SCC because House orders are not acts of parliament in the ordinary sense, they cannot be turned into laws. They are directives concerning disclosure made to elected representatives. The Harper Government knows this and Rob Nicholson has admitted as much.(Go back and read his statements on the matter.) They have not gone to the SCC because they know very well what the Court would say - House orders cannot be superseded. Law professors in both Canada and England have been clear on this matter.
I should add that the only possible matter for the SCC could be questions of privacy but since disclosure applies to the House and not to the public this is a Red Herring. MPs, can be sworn in essentially the same way judges are and therefore privacy doesn't enter into it. Members of Congress of both parties, for example, get daily briefings on such matters and many other countries work the same way.
Once again, orders of disclosure are not a matter for the SCC, but if asked they would agree with the opposition.
Kirby
I read your blogs. You advocate throwing politicians in jail.You are not a credible rational voice in this debate;anonymous or otherwise.
Wilson, pull your head out. Frank Iacabucci isn't sitting as a Supreme Court of Canada judge. He's presiding as Harper's beard, plain and simple. He's retired for Christ's sake. Stop being an idiot.
Second, please give us some legal basis for an ex-judge to say what Parliament may or may not demand to see? Spare us your parking lot legal opinion. Give us something reality based this time.
Third, it doesn't matter any more. The bird has flown the coop. Unless Harper showed the unredacted documents to Professor Attaran, he's already lost control of them. They're in public hands now and that means they're just an e-mail "send" key away from wide open dissemination.
Sorry Wilson but Stephen Harper may have just had his Daniel Ellsberg moment. Game, set and match.
i absolutely enjoy your posting choice, very attractive,
don't quit as well as keep creating mainly because it just nicely to read it,
looking forward to looked over much more of your own writing, have a good day ;)
Post a Comment