CANADIAN PARLIAMENT

CANADA IS A JUDICIAL DICTATORSHIP

The Canadian Supreme Court recently ruled that Canada cannot extradite people without seeking assurances they will not face the death penalty in the country to which they are sent. This is a graphic illustration of the Canadian Supreme Court telling the Canadian Parliament what is law and what is not law instead of the Canadian Parliament telling the Supreme Court what is law and what is not law. Either the Supreme Court has usurped the powers of parliament or parliament has put itself in the position of being completely subservient to the Supreme Court. It means that the judges of the Supreme Court make the laws in Canada -- they changed 58 laws in 16 years. It means that the elected MPs in Parliament are merely ornaments. It means that the prime minister, who introduced the notwithstanding clause in Parliament in 1982, is afraid to use it or reluctant to use it. It means that Canadians live in a judicial dictatorship.

This incident has come about because of Glen Burns and Atif Rafay are wanted for murder in the US. The Canadian Justice Minister Anne McLellan wants assurances from the state of Washington that they will not seek the death penalty in these cases. Not only is the Supreme Court of Canada browbeating the Canadian Parliament but they are also intimidating the US justice system. Why should the Americans give guarantees to the Canadian Justice Minister about the outcome of an American murder trial? Why should the Supreme Court of Canada be ALLOWED to impose their political philosophies on both Canada and the US? The Americans have difficulty adapting to the arrogance of pompous Canadian officials who try to push their socialist ideas on the US justice system. They have difficulty believing that Canada would refuse to return terrorists and criminals to be tried in a court of law. They find it hard to accept that Canada has become a judicial dictatorship. Canadians have no difficulty because they have been browbeaten into silence a long ago.

These types of judicial decisions have already added to the unique Canadian problem of a never-ending line of incoming phony refugees, illegal immigrants, international terrorists and criminals making their way to Canada from all over the world. These international criminals and terrorists know that when they arrive in Canada they can claim more rights than Canadians under the Canadian Charter of Rights and they can never be sent back to face judgment in the country where they committed their crimes.

This is a blueprint for future national and international controversies as various countries in the world want their criminals and terrorists returned in order to put them on trial and the Canadian penitentiaries fill up with these same criminals and terrorists. What happens when a Bin Laden type arrives in Canada? Then, as the Canadian Supreme Court refuses to extradite him and as Canadian parliamentarians still nod their heads, the Canadian people will still be allowed to look on helplessly. That's what happens in a judicial dictatorship.

Canadians are caught in the bind of having recently reelected these loony-left Liberals and therefore they will have to suffer this ignominy of not only being unable to change their Charter but also being helpless in the whirlwind of these future judicial events.

This is the start of something real big and stupid. Foresight and cleverness is not one of the fortes of our Supreme Court or our parliamentarians. Who will be the first to say, Enough is enough? Elected parliamentarians are elected to run Canada therefore they should run Canada not the appointed-for-life Supreme Court.

Make yourself into a lamb and someone will make himself into a wolf. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn