Comments on: Policing the G20 Summit: Whose Security? Whose Human Rights? http://prism-magazine.com/2010/07/policing-the-g20-summit-whose-security-whose-human-rights/ News and Views That Matter Thu, 17 May 2012 18:12:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: David de Weerdt http://prism-magazine.com/2010/07/policing-the-g20-summit-whose-security-whose-human-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-1187 David de Weerdt Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:09:15 +0000 http://prism-magazine.com/?p=1415#comment-1187 It would be an enlightening exercise to see what revisions to our Charter would be required so that in future, the Government of Canada's actions can always be uncontestedly WITHIN the limits of the revised Charter. I would like the Harper conservatives to table this as an Amendment to the Constitution in Parliament, and have it debated. Once The Harper Amendment is passed, the majority of Canadians can rest easy that the legal rights of unappealing people, once vexingly enshrined in our constitution, are no longer an impediment to the delivery of the kind of instant justice they want to see visited upon them. Why do we have our current legal rights laws (and consequent Court rulings) when the Government is 'forced' to ignore them? Dissenters would understand the limits on their freedoms. They would stay away in their large numbers stay away from public protests - they'd know they have no legal right to be there, and can expect to be delivered the wrath of police, if police feel this is warranted based on their perception of the validity of the protest. If those that did protest (or come to report on the protest) were searched, beaten, arrested and imprisoned without access to counsel, none of this would be illegal according to some limp-wristed 'lefty' Charter; protesters would know they were only getting what they deserved under our laws. Based on current polls, this is sure to be a political winner for the Conservatives. The McGuinty Government might appreciate it too. If not, I wonder, why not? Someone, please draft a revision of sections 7-12 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms FOR the Tories. I'm fascinated to know what it would need to say bring our legal system up to speed and in harmony with the Government's position relative to the Afghan detainee issue, the Omar Khadr case, and the kerfuffle over rights at the Toronto G20. Perhaps you'd have to go beyond the Charter, and address some of our international agreements, like the Geneva Convention? It would be an enlightening exercise to see what revisions to our Charter would be required so that in future, the Government of Canada's actions can always be uncontestedly WITHIN the limits of the revised Charter. I would like the Harper conservatives to table this as an Amendment to the Constitution in Parliament, and have it debated.

Once The Harper Amendment is passed, the majority of Canadians can rest easy that the legal rights of unappealing people, once vexingly enshrined in our constitution, are no longer an impediment to the delivery of the kind of instant justice they want to see visited upon them. Why do we have our current legal rights laws (and consequent Court rulings) when the Government is 'forced' to ignore them?

Dissenters would understand the limits on their freedoms. They would stay away in their large numbers stay away from public protests – they'd know they have no legal right to be there, and can expect to be delivered the wrath of police, if police feel this is warranted based on their perception of the validity of the protest. If those that did protest (or come to report on the protest) were searched, beaten, arrested and imprisoned without access to counsel, none of this would be illegal according to some limp-wristed 'lefty' Charter; protesters would know they were only getting what they deserved under our laws.

Based on current polls, this is sure to be a political winner for the Conservatives. The McGuinty Government might appreciate it too. If not, I wonder, why not?

Someone, please draft a revision of sections 7-12 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms FOR the Tories. I'm fascinated to know what it would need to say bring our legal system up to speed and in harmony with the Government's position relative to the Afghan detainee issue, the Omar Khadr case, and the kerfuffle over rights at the Toronto G20. Perhaps you'd have to go beyond the Charter, and address some of our international agreements, like the Geneva Convention?

]]> By: Thomas Foster http://prism-magazine.com/2010/07/policing-the-g20-summit-whose-security-whose-human-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-1134 Thomas Foster Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:19:21 +0000 http://prism-magazine.com/?p=1415#comment-1134 I agree with the content of this article, written by Alex Neve. I have filled out the accompanying form and sent the statement to the Canadian Government, calling for an independent review of the G20 security measures, the decision to locate the meeting in Toronto, and the impact of the security measures on the protection of human rights and the freedoms of speech and assembly. Such an independent review must be open to public input and be released to the public. I am making this comment to ask all people who read it to register their call for an independent review, including public input and a release of the review to the public, of the G20 security measures and the decision-making process regarding location and venue, and the impact of those security measures on the protection of human rights and the freedoms of speech and assembly. If you are afraid to do this, then overcome your fear now - if this problem is not exposed to sunlight in public soon, then it may get worse for all of us - power can be a short step to corruption, eh? I agree with the content of this article, written by Alex Neve. I have filled out the accompanying form and sent the statement to the Canadian Government, calling for an independent review of the G20 security measures, the decision to locate the meeting in Toronto, and the impact of the security measures on the protection of human rights and the freedoms of speech and assembly. Such an independent review must be open to public input and be released to the public.

I am making this comment to ask all people who read it to register their call for an independent review, including public input and a release of the review to the public, of the G20 security measures and the decision-making process regarding location and venue, and the impact of those security measures on the protection of human rights and the freedoms of speech and assembly.

If you are afraid to do this, then overcome your fear now – if this problem is not exposed to sunlight in public soon, then it may get worse for all of us – power can be a short step to corruption, eh?

]]>