Quote:
Originally Posted by shreddog
If anyone is interested in reading the Judge's decision directly, it can be found
HERE
|
For those who haven't read the decision, it's a good read.
The reference cases he cites are particularly ridiculous.
He kicks off by referencing
R v Keegstra as a section 2b violation, which from the case involved the following:
Quote:
During classes, he described Jews as a people of profound evil who had "created the Holocaust to gain sympathy." He also tested his students in exams on his theories and opinion of Jews.
|
Throughout his decision he also leans heavily on
Baier vs. Alberta, legislation that explicitly denied the right to run for office of school trustees who were involved in school boards. Sounds good but doug ford's Bill 5 is not explicitly saying anyone cannot run for office. Not relevant at all.
He also variously cites cases like
Figueroa v Canada and
Saskatchewan reference - two actually relevant cases which concern provincial redistricting and limiting political candidates. The problem? Both these cases were found of violations of
section 3 - democratic rights.
At the end of the day this decision was a total wack job. It is extremely clear once you peel back the layers of Belobaba's justification.
This is exactly what the NWC was meant to prevent - activist judges overstepping their bounds. I will repeat again, if Belobaba could not find a violation under section 3 of democratic rights, hinged upon changing things in the middle of an election (establishing that Toronto city council qualifies as a legislative assembly) - then he had absolutely no grounds to reject Bill 5.
I hope this goes to the supreme court, because have this black eye on constitutional precedence is a worse plight for our country than doug ford could ever be.