Michael Spratt argues that eliminating peremptory challenges – in the wake of the Colten Boushie case – defeats the intended purpose
Michael Spratt analyses the aftermath of Ontario’s Legal Aid funding cuts
Does a professional sports contract include a get-out-of-jail-free card for assault?
In the wake of several fatal shootings in Ottawa’s ByWard Market the city’s mayor Jim Watson desperately reached for the lowest of low hanging fruit – he wants to install CCTV surveillance cameras.
Sometimes judges make mistakes. Sometimes they get the facts wrong. Sometimes it’s the law. Mistakes are often corrected by appeal courts. That is how our system works. And although nothing is perfect, our system works pretty well.
There were lots of reasons to fire Caroline Mulroney. So very, very many reasons.
Some people believe the earth is flat. Some people believe climate change is a myth. Some people believe the justice system is colour-blind. All of those people are dangerously wrong.
The Canadian justice system is one of the pillars that supports our democracy. The rule of law gives people a legal recourse to hold those in power to account.
Last week, the Ontario budget slashed funding to Legal Aid Ontario by over 30 per cent. Adding to the cruelty, the $133 million cut takes effect immediately – there was no advanced notice. And to make matters even worse the province has directed LAO that no provincial money can be used to cover immigration and refugee law, leaving that program with a staggering and unexpected $45 million shortfall.
Just because there is not a law prohibiting an act does not make that act right or moral. Criminality should not and cannot represent the line of propriety in politics. A defence that no law was broken is usually the last line of defence for the morally bankrupt. So the real question is if Wilson-Raybould’s actions were moral? Was taping the conversation the right thing to do?