Skip to main content

So much for the rule of law

Today a federal judge threw out the Friends of the Earth (FOE) lawsuit against Baird and Environment Canada.

The suit which was first presented before the court back in June of this year, asked the court to compel the Conservative government to follow the then year old KPIA climate-change law.

The KPIA (Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act) was a private members bill put forward by Liberal Pablo Rodriguez, which passed into law in June 2007.

The law requires the government to meet its targets under the Kyoto Protocol and submit a plan showing how it would do so, as well as provide ongoing progress reports.

FOE submited that Baird defied the will of Parliament and dispensed with the rule of law by refusing to comply with the mandatory requirements of the KPIA.

Their suit raised the fundamental question of whether a Minister of the Crown, in this case Baird, the Minister of Environment, is accountable for ignoring the will of Parliament.

The government argued that the issue of Canada's response to the Kyoto agreement should be handled by voters not the courts.

Unfortunately the question of whether the government is allowed to ignore the rule of law was not raised during the past election and today Justice Robert Barnes ruled that it is not up to the court to decide... and even if it had the power to do so, there was no practical way to enforce a court order.

In the end this is not a case about the environment it is really a case about government accountability and adherence to the laws of Canada.

The decision itself says more about the state of our democracy, where there is no available recourse to force the government to obey a law, when it ideologically disagrees with it.

It would of been a great question to consider during the election. Of course it would of been hard to fit into a 30 second commercial.




Reference: Todays ruling via Faux News here , and June's story via the one we no longer mention here .





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Things that piss me off, today

Government Negotiations
Do you think that it might have been wiser to wait for the federal court decision on the legality of the approval process used by the National Energy Board when giving the go ahead for expansion of the Kinder Morgan bitumen pipeline, before spending 9 billion plus dollars on what was originally purchased for 110 million dollars by Kinder Morgan, ten years ago?
Considering that we all knew that Harper’s National Energy Board was nothing more than a corrupt industry rubber stamp. Isn’t that one of the many reasons we got rid of Harper, including of course hiding in a closet when we were attacked (in case anyone forgot)?
Somehow I am now supposed to be confident that our government can successfully renegotiate NAFTA with the Orange Asshole.
Jesus I’m sounding like a conservative.
Dating Apps
My son has become a player, in his dad’s mind. He has three different dating apps that apparently are for daters wanting three different types of dates. He showed me one app in…

Sometimes you need a subtle superhero to maintain your sanity

Introducing Subliminal Message Guy whom ironically, considering the title of this post, is fighting overactive online self promotion of narcissistic minds with hidden subliminal messages buried within seemingly polite, praise worthy comments.
Like this one here.



Trump is about to get his wish, lock children up longer

In the US it is currently against the law to imprison children who enter the US illegally. The 1997 law known as the the Flores Settlement Agreement (Flores) set national standards regarding the detention, release, and treatment of all children in immigration detention and underscores the principle of family unity.

It requires that:
Juveniles be released from custody without unnecessary delay, and in order of preference to the following: a parent, legal guardian, adult relative, individual specifically designated by the parent, a child welfare licensed program, or, alternatively when family reunification is not possible, an adult seeking custody deemed appropriate by the responsible government agency.Where they cannot be released because of significant public safety or flight risk concerns, juveniles must be held in the least restrictive setting appropriate to age and special needs, generally, in a nonsecure facility licensed by a child welfare entity and separated from unrelated adults…