In late November, the Rouleau Commission reviewing the use of the Emergencies Act finished hearing testimony from witnesses.
Asking whether the invocation of the Emergencies Act was justified is not a serious question. But no one should expect the Commission to come to that conclusion.As the Canadian national soccer teams head to their respective FIFA World Cups, Derek Van Diest is on the scene to cover all the action. Expect expert insights and analysis in your inbox daily throughout the tournaments, and weekly on Thursdays for the rest of the season.
But testimony at the Commission from the Ottawa police, Ontario Provincial Police, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Canadian Security and Intelligence Service, City of Ottawa, federal government officials, cabinet ministers and the prime minister himself confirms there was no such thing. There was no assault, arson, rape, bombing, or kidnapping. There was no storming of Parliament. There were no attempts to overthrow the government. No intelligence suggested the presence of weapons.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau testified that invoking the Act was justified to keep people safe. Otherwise, Trudeau said, “how would I explain it to the family of a police officer who was killed, or a grandmother who got run over trying to stop a truck, or if a protestor was killed in a violent clash with someone else?” In this view, “threats of serious violence” meant a situation in which something violent might occur, even if by accident.
المملكة العربية السعودية أحدث الأخبار, المملكة العربية السعودية عناوين
Similar News:يمكنك أيضًا قراءة قصص إخبارية مشابهة لهذه التي قمنا بجمعها من مصادر إخبارية أخرى.
Parliamentary committee hopes to lift PMO 'veil' shrouding the legal opinion behind Emergencies Act invocationAs the public inquiry into the government’s invocation of the Emergencies Act wrapped up its final phase of hearings with a series of round-table discussions from policy experts last week, members of the parliamentary committee studying the emergency declaration hope to crack open the “black box” of cabinet confidences and solicitor-client privileges that continues to obscure the government’s legal justification. Commissioner Paul Rouleau looks at Brendan Miller, counsel for Freedom Corp., during the Public Emergency Order Commission at Library and Archives Canada in Ottawa on Nov. 24. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade On the final day of the Public Order Emergency Commission, lawyers representing the “Freedom Convoy” organizers won their bid to get access to unredacted versions of 20 documents, which Commissioner Paul Rouleau said the government had agreed to release. Convoy lawyer Brendan Miller, who had applied to have the documents unredacted, argued that the written notes and text messages belonging to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s (Papineau, Que.) staff should not be protected by parliamentary privilege. The addition of the newly unredacted documents will contribute to the “virtually unprecedented” levels of transparency Rouleau said had resulted from the production of more than 9,000 exhibits and 300 hours of testimony during the commission’s previous seven weeks of hearings. “I am satisfied that I now have the evidence that I need to make the factual findings and to answer the questions I have been mandated to ask, namely, why did the federal government declare the emergency, how did it use its powers, and were those actions appropriate?” Rouleau said in his closing statement on Nov. 25. “I am confident that I am now well-positioned to provide those answers.” However, the answer to the first question—on the legal justification the government used to invoke the Emergencies Act—could still be out of the commission’s reach. During his testimony be
اقرأ أكثر »
Trudeau, ministers emerge from Rouleau Commission testimony 'relatively unscathed,' say insidersPrime Minster Justin Trudeau, cabinet members, and high-level government officials who testified before the Public Order Emergency Commission emerged without too much political damage, say insiders and experts, as critics were hard-pressed to find successful lines of attack on the government. According to a document tabled on Nov. 25, a Feb. 14 first ministers’ conference call surrounding the Emergencies Act was convened prior to a final decision being made, with the prime minister concluding that he was “confident we can find a resolution to the situation,” and that he was conscious of concerns around inflaming the protest. Trudeau also said his recollection was that the use of the Emergencies Act would be “step by step, proportional, and not overreaching.” The prime minister invoked the Emergencies Act for the first time in Canada’s history later that day to bring an end to the weeks-long occupation by protesters railing against pandemic restrictions. Police required two days to clear protesters out of downtown Ottawa before the declaration was revoked on Feb. 23. Pollster Nik Nanos said a lot of the testimony heard throughout the inquiry reinforced what most Canadians already knew, which was that there was a “hot mess” between different law enforcement agencies, and between the federal government and provinces such as Ontario and Alberta. “That said, all Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) had to do was not make a mistake, and he got through it without making a mistake, so from a public opinion perspective, that’s a win,” said Nanos of the prime minister’s highly anticipated appearance on the final day of the commission’s hearings. There are “inherent risks” in having any prime minister testify before an inquiry, but Nanos called it “very unusual” for a prime minister to gain support as a result of testifying before an inquiry. Pollster Nik Nanos says there are ‘inherent risks’ in having any prime minister testify before an inquiry, but that Trudeau got through witho
اقرأ أكثر »
BC’s new cabinet puts spotlight on housing, climate emergenciesCabinet shuffle sees demotion for finance minister who leaves a massive $5.7-billion surplus
اقرأ أكثر »
VEZINA: We need to fix how we handle national emergenciesRegardless of where the fault lies, it is clear there are serious flaws in how Canada handles national emergencies.
اقرأ أكثر »
Opinion | Blind faith in Danielle Smith’s Sovereignty Act will hurt AlbertansOpinion: I got a lot of pushback last week for comparing Alberta Premier Danielle Smith to a bad drunk in a bar. So I’d like to apologize — to drunks in bars. Blind faith in Danielle Smith’s Sovereignty Act will hurt Albertans.
اقرأ أكثر »
Rahim Mohamed: Danielle Smith's Alberta Sovereignty Act pretty awkward for the RCMPUse of the act to block Justin Trudeau’s gun buyback program would put the Mounties in no\u002Dman’s land
اقرأ أكثر »