Thursday, March 10, 2022

Let This Sink In For A Minute

On March 7, 2022, Ontario Superior Court Justice John M. Johnston released Tamara Lich from jail, where she had spent the previous 18 days. Tamara Lich is one of the fundraising organizers for the Freedom Convoy of truckers, who protested peacefully in Ottawa against the ongoing violations of the Charter rights and freedoms of Canadians.

Ms. Lich is a mother and grandmother from Medicine Hat, Alberta, working in oil-and-gas administration. She was arrested in Ottawa on February 17, charged with violating Criminal Code section 464 for having counselled mischief: the obstruction, interruption and interference with the use and enjoyment of property. Ms. Lich’s arrest on February 17 was not valid because section 464 only applies to situations where someone counsels another person to commit an offence and the offence is not committed. If the counselled offence is actually committed, section 464 does not apply, and the “counselor” can instead be charged with aiding and abetting under section 21 of the Criminal Code. But the alleged crimes of the truckers, if it was indeed a crime to cause some inconvenience to some Ottawa residents, had taken place. Therefore, the offence (if any) had been committed, and therefore section 464 could not possibly apply to Ms. Lich.

It appears that the police recognized their mistake and the illegality of the arrest. The following day, when Ms. Lich was already in jail, police charged her with wilfully obstructing, interrupting, or interfering with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property contrary to section 430(1)(c) of the Criminal Code. Ms. Lich did not have a truck with her in Ottawa, so it will be hard for the Crown to prove that she obstructed, interrupted or interfered.

After spending five nights in jail, Ms. Lich was denied bail on February 22 by Justice Julie Bourgeois, a Liberal candidate in the 2011 federal election. Justice Bourgeois’ decision to keep Tamara Lich in prison was highly unusual, considering that Ms. Lich has no criminal record and was not charged with a violent offence. People accused of drug trafficking, possessing illegal firearms and violent offences are routinely granted freedom prior to trial.

Justice Bourgeois claimed that Ms. Lich was facing a lengthy prison sentence and used this claim as part of the reason for keeping Ms. Lich in jail. The judge’s claim was not grounded in reality, considering the lenient sentences imposed on those who engaged in violent protests at the G20 summit in Toronto in 2010. For example, Robin Henry was not sentenced to any jail time for engaging in a pattern of brazen and wilfully destructive rampage, damaging businesses and risking injury to bystanders. Richard Morano was one of the individuals identified as causing extensive property damage to several businesses, vandalizing a police vehicle, and injuring a policeman inside that vehicle. Yet the pre-meditated wilful destruction of public and private property netted him only seven months in jail.

Considering the lenient sentences imposed on protesters in Toronto who were actually violent, how much jail time can the truckers realistically fear for what they did in Ottawa in February: waving Canadian and Quebec flags, feeding the homeless, picking up garbage, singing the national anthem, dancing in the streets and setting up bouncy castles for children? The notion that Tamara Lich ever faced a lengthy prison sentence is absurd, yet this formed part of the reason for Justice Bourgeois to keep Ms. Lich in jail for more than two weeks.

**

One of the RCMP’s national security investigators who helped bring down the shocking Toronto 18 terrorist plots in 2006 testified Wednesday in support of one of those convicted being granted a licence to practise law.

The chorus of supporters for Saad Gaya at Ontario’s Law Society Tribunal also includes his former parole officer, university professors, several established lawyers, an imam prominent in extremist rehabilitation and Gaya’s wife, who is herself a lawyer.

The tribunal must decide whether Gaya, a convicted terrorist sentenced to 18 years in prison for his part in an al-Qaida-inspired plan to bomb the Toronto Stock Exchange, Canada’s spy agency, and a military base, is now “of good character,” a requirement to practise law in Ontario. A criminal conviction is not an automatic no.

Lawyers representing Gaya said the unusual testimony in his favour highlights his remorse and rehabilitation.

RCMP Insp. Marwan Zogheib was part of the national security team that unravelled the terror plots in 2006. He helped investigate, arrest and prosecute Gaya and his terror associates.

Zogheib said Gaya seemed different from the others right from the start. He said Gaya showed remorse and renounced his extremist views early and worked with the RCMP to find ways to counter extremist recruitment and to train officers.

 

 Yep.

 

No comments: