In this second-to-last segment, Ernst Zundel tells briefly of Doug Christie's ban from the Canadian Parliament and the initial reaction in the media:
Little did we realize what we had unleashed with my bold legal move! Little did we know that only hours after Doug Christie made such eloquent and telling arguments against my being banned from the Charles Lynch Room in the Press Gallery in the Parliament Building - that he, Doug Christie the Attorney, would be himself banned from that same room and place! For even more questionable and grotesque reasons!
Doug Christie had announced a press conference while still in Victoria, B.C. for the 19th of January 1999, 10:00 A.M. to discuss not only the incredible ". . . truth is no defence" CHR Tribunal outrage, but also the newly proposed, expanded "hate law" revisions which will incorporate the ". . . truth is no defence" idea into this hate-crime statute. If these new definitions become law in Canada, Holocaust Revisionism will be automatically considered a hate crime!
Doug Christie clearly stated in this press release that he was speaking as the lawyer for the Canadian Free Speech League! Not for me!
Doug Christie did not know about this ban and found out only at 11:00 P.M. from an official of the Press Gallery that the ban was already in effect against him! No one had bothered to tell him! Even the next day, the Ottawa Citizen had run a pretty balanced article about the hearings before Judge Chadwick, but did not say a word about the "Christie Ban", as it is called. Why not? It's anybody's guess.
I found out at 7:00 A.M. on the 19th of January from a conversation with my lady attorney at the breakfast table!
I had, in fact, feared that this might happen. Secretly I had hoped the powers-that-be would, for their own good, exercise some self-control, not thought control. Not so! The arrogance displayed by the politicians ought not to be lost on Judge Chadwick - for judges, too, read the papers!
Shortly thereafter, the Ottawa Citizen and the National Post did prominently cover the Christie Ban. The intellectually decrepit Globe and Mail lived up to its image and reported nothing. Neither did the rest of the Toronto media.
A Zundel watcher, carefully following the media coverage of the Christie Ban, wrote shortly afterwards in an Open Letter to "Friends of Freedom", including excerpts from the National Post, January 21, 1999:
"Christie and Zundel, working in tandem, made a significant breakthrough in the pages of the *National Post*. They appear side by side on p. A7 of today's edition, accompanied by a reasonably fair article slanted toward objectivity and, for a change, focused on the real issues: free speech and freedom of assembly:
Parliamentary ban by Parent alarms civil-liberties officials
by Tim Naumetz (Southam News, dated January 20, 1999)
Gilbert Parent, the Speaker of the House of Commons, was wrong to ban the lawyer for Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel from the parliamentary precincts this week, a spokesman for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association said yesterday.
Alan Borovoy, the association's general counsel, said Mr. Parent issued what appears to be an arbitrary edict that ignored basic standards of fairness when he extended a previous ban against Zundel to his lawyer, Douglas Christie.
"Parliament ought to be governed by the standards of fairness and due process that have been the hallmarks of democratic societies," Mr. Borovoy said, after Mr. Parent's officials prevented Mr. Christie from entering Parliament. (...)
Mr. Parent's press secretary, Heather Bradley, said the Speaker extended the ban to include Mr. Christie after House leaders for all five parties in the Commons agreed to support the action.
While the Commons approved the ban against Zundel by adopting a motion from Don Boudria, the government House leader, there was no record of Mr. Parent's ruling on Mr. Christie, or any written reasons for the decision. (...)
Hansard, the official record of Commons debate, contains a brief record of the motion against Zundel, but the reference does not include any reason for the decision.
"As far as I know, there are no criteria governing access to Parliament for these purposes," said Mr. Borovoy. "There is a great risk of being arbitrary, and Parliament should be governed by standards of fair play and due process. Those are the norms of democratic governments."
Well, that is nice of Borovay. Will he now follow up and tell the same lofty words to the Human Rights Tribunal, by appearing as my expert witness in April or May? I doubt it. Words are one thing, actions another!
Tomorrow: Part VII "Two Weeks in the Life of Ernst Zundel"
Thought for the Day:
"An error is the more dangerous the more truth it contains."
(Henri Frédéric Amiel)
Back to Table of Contents of the Feb. 1999 ZGrams