ZGram - 6/30/2004 - "Judge Blais protects his cronies"

[zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org]

Zgram - Where Truth is Destiny:  Now more than ever!

  June 30, 2004

  Good Morning from the Zundelsite"

  I had already reported on Judge Blais's unprofessional and biased 
judgment in refusing Ernst to call the witnesses he needs.  Here is 
Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, 
commenting on that ruling:

  [START]

  Dear Free Speech Supporter:

  	On June 23, in a stunning move, Mr. Justice Pierre Blais 
quashed all four subpoenas sought by  dissident publisher Ernst 
Zundel's defence team. The subpoenas were for Keith Landy, President 
of the Canadian Jewish Congress; Frank Dimant, President of the 
League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith; Ontario Judge Lauren 
Marshall; and Andrew Mitrovica, author of COVERT ENTRY: SPIES, LIES 
AND CRIMES INSIDE CANADA'S SECRET SERVICE.

  	Judge Blais's decision is preposterous in its reasoning and 
almost laughable in its feigned naivete. "Lobbying ministers is a 
legitimate exercise in an open and  democratic society such as 
Canada. Anyone has the opportunity to lobby any  minister at any time 
and make his or her views known. In this case, the only  evidence 
that was provided concerned the public lobbying by both Mr. Landy's 
organization and Mr. Dimant's organization. They met with the 
Ministers,  they issued press releases," [PARA. 15] he writes. 

  Does "anyone" really have the same opportunity to lobby powerful 
ministers as do organizations like the CJC and B'nai Brith? Most of 
us have trouble getting our own MP to even acknowledge,  let alone 
really answer a letter. When was the last time you called, say, the 
Minister of Justice for an appointment and got one? When was the 
first time?

  	The judge goes on to argue: "I have not been convinced that 
Mr. Landy  or Mr. Dimant would be able to shed any new light on the 
reasonableness of the Ministers' decision. The intervention of the 
CJC and B'nai Brith has been public and consistent. It is clear that 
pressure has been exerted by the two organizations, both in public 
statements and private meetings. This,  to me, has nothing to do with 
the reasonableness of the certificate, nor with whether Mr. Zündel 
presents a danger to Canadian society." [PARA 20] 

  On the contrary, it would be very important to know what the two 
Jewish lobby groups told the ministers. Were there promises made, 
threats, explicit or implied? Was documentation presented about Mr. 
Zundel? If so, what was it? As we know that Mr. Zundel's supporters 
did not have any access to the ministers,  it might well be that 
having heard from only one side -- CSIS's allegations and Mr. 
Zundel's bitter opponents -- the ministers' decision in signing the 
certificate was unreasonable.

  	It's interesting that the usually vocal and voluble Jewish 
groups suddenly had an attack of shyness when subpoenaed to testify 
and to be closely questioned about their activities.

  	Mr. Justice Blais also relieves himself of another 
extraordinary conclusion: 

  "The intent or  motives of the Ministers is of no interest to this 
Court." [PARA. 19]

  Surely, if knuckling under to intense pressure from a powerful 
financial and ethnic lobby group was the ministers' motive in signing 
the certificate to get rid of Mr. Zundel, this motive is relevant as 
to whether their action was "reasonable".

  	It's not surprising that former CSIS boss Judge Blais -- he 
was Solicitor-General in 1989 and, therefore, in charge of CSIS, when 
they began a rampage of spying and infiltration of "right-wing" 
groups, including Preston Manning's Reform Party -- would seek to 
protect CSIS.

  While admitting that Mitrovica's report that CSIS knew the May, 1995 
bomb sent to Mr. Zundel by anarchists was on its way and did nothing 
to warn him or others is a serious matter, Judge Blais insists: 

  "I believe Mr. Mitrovica has little material evidence to contribute 
beyond what has already  been published. Compelling him to produce 
his notes and materials is unduly  intrusive, and given the little 
probative value that I could attach to such  hearsay materials, I see 
no need to disturb the journalistic privilege that  attaches to Mr. 
Mitrovica's evidence. [PARA. 30]

  	Those following the proceedings would have to laugh at this. 
The government's public case has been filled with hearsay and double 
hearsay evidence. The Judge under Sec. 78.e of the Immigration and 
Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) can accept [and has] "anything" as 
evidence, including things not normally accepted in a Canadian court 
of law. Now, Mr. Justice Blais suddenly develops an aversion to 
hearsay.

  	As Mr. Mitrovica's charges are so serious, it would be very 
helpful to Mr. Zundel to be able to establish their credibility. It 
the charges are true, they prove a murderous hostility on the part of 
CSIS toward the German-born dissident and call into question the 
"reasonableness" of the CSIS certificate calling this lifelong 
pacifist a "terrorist".

  	Judge Lauren Marshall had been one of Mr. Zundel's lawyer in 
the 1980s. Originally, she had agreed to testify about the 
extraordinary swiftness with which the government sought to deport 
Mr. Zundel after his 1985 conviction (subsequently overturned) for 
publishing "false news." This speed was is contrast to the usuaally 
lackadaisical pace -- five years or more -- in the judge's long 
experience for the government to seek the deportation of violent 
criminals. Her testimony would help establish the long-time bias of 
the Canadian government against Mr. Zundel and, therefore, undermine 
the "reasonableness" of the CSIS certificate branding him a 
"terrorist".

  	Nevertheless, Judge Blais concludes: 

  "Mr. Zündel has failed to convince me of the relevance of the 
deportation process almost 20 years ago, which was based on a 
conviction in  a criminal court. The conviction has been voided, the 
deportation process halted, and the present certificate is an 
entirely different process, based  on entirely different evidence." 
[PARA. 37]

  	In a final stroke of petty judicial one-upsmanship, Judge 
Blais insists he doesn't need to be told by a mere provincial court 
judge how to do his job.

   "Finally, as to the last purpose for which Justice Marshall  would 
testify, I will state only this. I apply the legislation, I did not 
write it. I have stated many times in the course of these proceedings 
how difficult it is to have to deal with secret evidence. I do not 
need to be reminded of the perils of ex parte proceedings, nor to be 
told how to carry  out my judicial duties."  [PARA. 41]

  	Perhaps, the only positive aspect of Judge Blais's latest 
attempt to cripple Mr. Zundel's defence is that he declined to award 
costs against Mr. Zundel.

  	Chi-Kun Shi, defence co-counsel, says: "The only hope left is 
really our appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. We're getting very 
blunt in our submission about Judge Blais' behaviour, and his 
decision about the subpoenas is just the latest example."

 
		Paul Fromm

 
		Director

 
		CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION