By Dr. Charles McVety
Freedom is the most valuable right a government can ensure. That sweet fragrance of being free, to set your own path, worship your own way and speak your mind without fear. To raise your children the way you see fit, chose a job, and travel whenever you wish. To live with liberty driving every heartbeat is precious to the soul. Our freedom stems from the form of government we live under. Democracy is a system that should allow the people to determine who leads the nation, who writes the laws and what laws to live under. Ronald Reagan said “Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honourable form of government ever devised by man”. Other nations in history have tried various forms of government but freedom-based democracy is what people yearn for.
Tragically a paradigm shift has occurred in western nations and with every hit of the judge’s gavel our freedoms are being eroded; slowly, systemically, substantially and dangerously. The Magna Carta, the great charter of freedoms, and Habeas Corpus, freedom from authoritarian rule, is not being upheld. Oliver Cromwell’s battle to wrestle dictatorial power from the King in the 17th century and restrict lawmaking to elected officials has now been overthrown. Once again unelected, unaccountable, individuals have exalted themselves above the people and have begun to issue edicts as law. These new philosopher kings are Canada’s judges with Justice Beverley McLachlin as the Chief. Justice Beverley McLachlin brazenly stated in 2001, "As we enter the 21st century we are embracing a new conception of democracy.... there is little point to decrying the fact that judges make law, they do and they must".
These new decrees have caused tremendous change to social laws including same sex marriage, legalization of sex clubs, criminalizing parts of scripture, redefining the family, abortion on demand, and now attempts to legalize prostitution, euthanasia and polygamy. Fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of the press have been compromised. Tiny factions of society, partnered with judges, have rewritten many laws established by centuries of democracy with a stroke of a pen. Some believe they have exceptional lobbying efforts, others suggest media sympathy is to blame. The truth is that these changes are not happening due to the exercise of skilful democratic processes but by the decrees of a handful of justices. How did they obtain such power? What is their agenda? And does this paradigm shift substantially effect freedom and democracy?
Today judges are no longer bound by their vital democratic role of interpreting and enforcing the law. Instead, they have assumed the role of lawmakers guided by "unwritten constitutional principles", answerable to no one with virtually zero accountability. Somehow judges across our country have seized power as "lawmakers" and are exercising that power to change society.
Canada 's constitution explicitly gives Parliament the exclusive power to write laws. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms sets the foundational laws upon which the country is based. However it does not give judges the power to be lawmakers. They can interpret and enforce the law but not write it.
In Beverley McLachlin's speech to judges and lawyers in 2001, she lays out the argument why judges must be lawmakers. She states, "Another factor in the new social policy role of judges cited by scholars is the perceived inability or unwillingness of legislative bodies to deal with pressing social issues." This logic is that since parliament won't deal with a social agenda of change, then judges must step in and assume power. This assumption is backed by their perception of popularity. McLachlin states, "public approval of the Court is tied to the perceived integrity of the judicial process." She cites the "Institute for Research on Public Policy conducted last year, which found that 77 percent of Canadians were generally satisfied with the way the
Supreme Court has been working." With such a level of apparent public support judges believe we, the people have consented to make them legitimate lawmakers.
Judges play a vital role in civilization with the responsibility of interpreting and enforcing the law, but not as lawmakers. In Beverley McLachlin's address, she stated "We all possess a certain image of a judge. He is old, male, and wears pinstriped trousers. He decides only what is necessary, says only what is necessary, and on no account ever talks to the press. He is respected and revered. His word is, literally and figuratively, the law, eternal, majestic." In order to keep the peace and maintain a nation of laws, judges must adjudicate disputes and exercise the law. However, the Chief Justice seems to believe that their role far exceeds these duties. The only one who can establish law with His word is God and judges are not God.
Not only do they describe themselves with divine adjectives, today’s judges seem to derive their decisions from both personal, and unwritten imaginary sources. "It is impossible to eliminate the judge's personal views....The rule of law requires judges to uphold unwritten constitutional norms, even in the face of clearly enacted laws or hostile public opinion," said a prepared text of the lecture Judge McLachlin gave to law students at Victoria University of Wellington. It is arrogant and offensive to declare new laws based on the whim of a judge clearly contradicting democratic laws and without public support. Also, did I read that right, “Unwritten constitutional norms”? Is this phrase not an oxymoron? Where can we read or study this “unwritten constitution” or is it in the theatre of her mind?”
If they don’t follow an actual constitution, how do the judges arrive at a decision? According to Beverley McLachlin, "The judge must strive for objectivity. This requires an act of imagination." The Chief Justice goes on to admit that judges are neither educated nor equipped to make laws. She states, "The new task which judges have been assigned is not easy. There is a very real question whether courts, which lack resources for gathering and collating information and opinion available to the legislatures, are the best institutions to decide complex social policy questions. But that question is increasingly moot." This would be like saying I am not trained as a surgeon and I don’t have an operating room or a scalpel but I am going to operate on you anyway.
After being appointed for life, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin speaks of democracy with contempt stating, “democracy is not unlike communism, fascism and totalitarian government”. She also decreed on May 5th , 2001, "the lawmaking role of the judge has dramatically expanded. Judicial lawmaking is no longer always confined to small, incremental changes. Increasingly, it is invading the domain of social policy, once perceived as the exclusive right of Parliament and the legislatures." Judges across the country are now making new laws every month and changing the foundational fabric of the nation. Judges now rule Canada with Beverley McLachlin as the Chief lawmaker.
This new social policy lawmaking role of the judge is not only an attack on democracy but also undermines the integrity of the judicial system in Canada. McLachlin explains that in every legal case, "...there is a bi-polar dispute between the immediate parties, but, within it, there is a Charter issue that is polycentric." Instead of Judges doing their duty, concentrating on adjudicating the dispute, today judges looks for this polycentric principle upon which a new law can be superimposed.
Today there are three major court cases underway where judges may very well legalize polygamy, prostitution and euthanasia. In British Columbia charges of polygamy against two men married to multiple wives, were dropped with the judge raising questions about the constitutionality of the ban. The BC Attorney General launched a full scale case in the BC Supreme Court asking the Judges to decide whether or not polygamy should be legalized. In Ontario three prostitutes have filed a law-suit asking the court to overturn the anti-prostitution laws in the nation. In Quebec another case is underway with the potential of making it legal to participate in another person’s death, euthanasia. In the next few months three more massive changes to the social fabric of Canada could be made by the tyranny of Canadian judges.
C.S. Lewis once said, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Our beloved democracy is besieged by an army of judges re-writing the foundations of our civil society with little regard to freedom, morality, decency, the rule of law or the democratic fabric that makes Canada the greatest country in the world. Some forty years ago Americans woke up to the danger of judicial dictates. Conservative politician Barry Goldwater said in the 1960’s, “Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed.” Today America has appointed enough constructionist judges to stop judicial lawmaking by the Supreme Court. Even the latest Supreme Court judge appointed by Barak Obama, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said “ A judge's role is not to make law, it is to apply the law.”
Unfortunately Canadians have not realized that the absolute power of lawmaking judges is placing our beloved democracy in peril and our children are set to inherit a socialistic judicial dictatorship lacking basic freedoms and civil social policy. In my youth we were faced with the threat of Communism and we studied the words of George Orwell, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” The thin vale of political correctness must be pierced with the truth and we must stand up to those who have usurped Parliament and democracy.
The full feature documentary film Besieged, Democracy Under Attack is set to be released in early December. Get a copy so you can see the evidence yourself. www.besieged.tv
