Backdoor tyranny
Discover more from Robert Vaughan
Backdoor tyranny
Why did the legal system fail to protect civil liberties?
Bruce Pardy, Executive Director of Rights Probe and Professor of Law at Queen’s University, gave expert testimony to the National Citizens Inquiry on March 29th in Toronto.
He answered the question which has been on the minds of many Canadians during COVID who suffered at the hands of overbearing medical officials:
Why did the legal system fail to protect civil liberties?
Professor Pardy explained that Canada’s Administration, the Executive branch of our government, has, over the years, been delegated by our elected Parliament to create the rules and regulations governing Canadians’ lives. Also, the courts defer to these officials treating them as experts in their fields whose decisions, they believe, are unquestionably in the public interest.
A solid recommendation by Professor Pardy is to create a non-delegation doctrine similar to that in other countries.
The doctrine of nondelegation (or non-delegation principle) is the theory that one branch of government must not authorize another entity to exercise the power or function which it is constitutionally authorized to exercise itself. ~ Wikipedia
In the United States, this doctrine derives from Article 1, Section 1 of their Constitution.
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
A nondelegation doctrine would provide transparency and accountability and make the separation of powers between the Canadian Legislative and Executive branches more distinct.
In conjunction with Professor Salim Mansur’s suggested amendment to the Charter of Rights and Freedom’s preamble to include the words “… derived from the will of the people” (see my previous Substack article) such a doctrine appended to our Constitution would advance Canada’s standing as a free and democratic country.
Backdoor tyranny
This is also a good idea but how do you implement it in a system where the leader of the Executive is also a member of the Legislative? The Prime Minister isn't elected by popular vote on that position alone The Prime Minister is elected as an M.P. who is also the leader of the party and as leader of the party he is the designated sole member of the Executive branch.
If the Americans who were blessed with a Constitution that outlines the separation of powers in detail cannot any longer abide by their own Constitution because the Legislative branch refuses to assert its powers over against the Executive and they now have an Executive that refuses to even exercise its own powers because such refusal is an expedient method to attain the party's political goals then how is Canada going to do it?
We already have a system of Backbenchers who are cowed into submission because they need the Executive branch M.P./party leader to sign their running papers. Basically the Canadian system is just a certification of a bunch of Yes people who don't say no to the M.P./leader who also occupies the P.M.'s chair.
I know that nobody wants to hear it but the Canadian system needs to be torn up and redone from top to bottom. Otherwise all that you are doing is squeezing in one spot only to have it balloon out of another spot. Both the system and the people in it are broken.
Here's the latest example of the U.S. Congress and Executive branch empowering the Imperial Presidency:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/a-bipartisan-blunder/