Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Court Ruling

I'm sure you've all read the story about the court decision that came down yesterday.
I'm awaiting some information on the ruling, but the article breaks it down and Impolitical goes into more detail here.
While it must be said that this was a win for the Conservatives, until the other case moves forward, this is not the sweeping victory a Pierre Poilievre would have you believe.
In the end, the court ruled that Mayrand did not have enough evidence to withhold the rebate. It specifically did not rule on the legality of the overall program, as far as I can tell.
It is a story that I'll be following, specifically as to whether or not Elections Canada will appeal the decision and of course, the on-going investigation being undertaken by Commissioner of Elections Canada.


Anonymous said...

Did Harper not put Cons. judges in the Federal Court?

KNB said...

Um, I wouldn't go there Anon.

For the most part, I still have great faith in our judicial system and respect the judiciary to interpret the law fairly.

Some rulings may have people thinking that, but I'm more inclined to believe that the Conservatives play it so bloody close to the line that they get away with it.

They work the system so to speak, which is ironic because that is what they accuse so many in this country of doing.

Mar said...

Government Research / Funding Scandal

**Updated Jan 19th**

CAMH / Brock University


Medicine Gone Bad



Gayle said...

I am not sure I disagree with the decision because Mayrand's authority comes from the legislation.

I think whether or not the party is prosecuted under the Act may come down to what evidence comes out of the search of the headquarters. In this case EC relied on the affidavit in support of the search warrant. It is hearsay evidence and is sufficient to obtain a search warrant, but the judge did not find it compelling enough in the trial.

If, however, there is more evidence that emerges as a result of the search the party may be prosecuted. If there is no more evidence I suspect EC will not prosecute.

Does anyone know if the documents that were seized during the raid have been unsealed? Last I heard they were still sealed because the party was claiming they were part of solicitor client priviledge and thus in the hands of the court. As far as I know EC has not even seen them yet.

Marpman said...

It is unfortunate as it really is not about the strict interpretation of the law. Yes, technically what you did was OK...but ethically?
If you claim to be the next revolution in government, wiping away years of 'Liberal' abuse...then why would you even take the chance of the appearance?
It smacks of arrogance, of a party which knows that it can do this and that people won't remember, nor vote appropriately. More a sad testament to 'us', the common person for not holding them accountable than any law.
I believe that there are still some cards which will play out here...hoping for some good news-bites to keep it in the public eye.