Courting dictatorship
Judicial over and under reach
I always considered the law and its institutions to be the last bastions of respectability and civilized existence. Even in a minarchist state, we need the law. We need to trust and respect the law and its institutions. This respectability is crumbling. Dressing up like Santa won’t save it. The robes and the wigs are supposed to project the idea of respect for tradition. The way to destroy a civilization is through destroying the law and through hollowing out its institutions. Replacing supreme court ‘Justices’ with sock puppets, prosecutors with political activists.
A little aside:
I have always been appalled by the arrogance of the word ‘justice’ applied to a person. A judge is a person whose business is to make judgements. Justice is a notion, an ideal to strive for.
When we say “Justice was served”, we mean that a judgment was made in the spirit of, and in accordance with the ideal. It means that by applying the law, we were in the service of justice itself.
When we call judges ‘Justices’, we imply that they are not the servants of the law but its maters, the superhuman embodiment of the ideal itself.
The decline did not, of course, start today. Lawfare did not start today. Judicial activism did not start today. Stretching the interpretation of the law did not start today. Selective prosecution did not start today.
The show trials and purges of communism were designed to offer a mantle of respectability to political murder. The trial that put me in jail was just a show trial to send a message to the public.
The front-page news of last week was the arrest of Pavel Durov.
The one that got a lot less attention is the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision to dismiss an appeal contesting the constitutionality of the government mandate to get vaccinated in order to travel on trains, busses or planes.
Ottawa suspended the mandate before the jointly heard cases could go before a judge. The Attorney General moved a motion to have the applications declared “moot,” arguing there was no “no live issue between the parties.”
Federal Court Justice Jocelyne Gagné ruled in favour of the mootness motion in October 2022, saying the applicants have “substantially received the remedies sought and as such, there is no live controversy to adjudicate.”
“There is no important public interest or inconsistency in the law that would justify allocating significant judicial resources to hear these moot Applications,” (source)
Maxime Bernier illustrated the logic with this analogy:
“Madam, your husband used to beat you, but it appears he has stopped for now. So, your complaint is moot. There’s nothing we can do.”
Justin Trudeau’s Covid measures violated the most basic human rights in Canada:
The freedom of speech, the freedom of assembly, the freedom of association, the freedom of movement, the right to work, the right to run a business and even the freedom of bodily autonomy. All of it for no good reason and all of it before the arbitrary application of the new rules. The supreme court of Canada considers all of these violations of our rights “moot”.
Their decisions are not surprising. In Canada, Supreme Court justices are appointed by the Prime minister, and his decisions cannot be questioned. All appointments are political. Trudeau appointed six out of the nine presently presiding ‘Justices’. At least three of them are diversity hires. Justine is big on that. A French language rights activist, the first native representation in the court and the first Muslim (and ‘visible minority), of course. I would not emphasize any of this if their Wikipedia pages wouldn’t make such big deal of it.
Justin Trudeau turned the Supreme Court of Canada into a politically motivated, partisan, woke slaves of political power.
The court also refused to hear other cases related to the Covid-19 measures.
The attitude is eerily reminiscent of the refusal of American courts to hear cases about electoral fraud after the 2020 election. Several cases were dismissed without a trial, without a chance of the plaintiff’s presenting their evidence. We could call this type of activism judicial under-reach.
This matter is very personal to me. My wife is suffering from multiple myeloma, a particularly nasty cancer. The incidence of this particular cancer quadrupled since the start of the Covid vaccination. The probability that her cancer is a vaccine side-effect is 75%. She only got the ‘vaccine’ to be able to travel, to visit her mother in Europe.
The travel restrictions were a serious violation of her rights. I have a hard time seeing her cancer as “moot” and find it distressing that Big Pharma and the entire medical establishment thinks nothing of it. We have no access to life saving medicine and doctors who could actually help us would be risking their license for doing so.
The politicization of justice is happening all over the Western world. George Soros spent over a hundred million dollars on corrupting the system by getting radical activist attorneys elected into key positions in states where they can do the most damage. It is also where he can get the most bang for the bucks. Some of that money was also spent on corrupting the electoral processes. Some of it goes to support violent rioting, arson and looting in “mostly peaceful” protests. It is amazing what a strategically placed pile of stones can do to improve the peacefulness of a protest.
Pavel Durov is getting all the attention this week, and rightly so. The criminal prosecution of the owner of a company for the purported, alleged, supposed, may be, possibly criminal behaviour of some unspecified users is truly beyond the pale. What’s next? Arresting Tim Cook for some people keeping pornographic images on the devices they bought from Apple? Laying criminal charges against the CEOs of phone companies for the conversations that may have happened using their network? Why stop there? We could jail the captain of a cruise ship of somebody gets assaulted on the boat they are responsible for. Maybe they could share a cell with the board of directors of the cruise line.
Inventing new and fake crimes
goes hand-in-hand with ignoring real ones.
The erosion of the law and justice from both sides, by enabling criminality on the one hand while prosecuting political opponents on the other, are the two sides of the same coin, the destruction of the law, the foundation of civilized existence.
The two-pronged drive toward a totalitarian, globalist New World Order.
What explains the despicable treatment of
Pavel Durov in France,
Elon Musk in the EU and Brazil,
- in Germany,
Donald Trump and RFK Jr., in the USA,
Julian Assange and Edward Snowden by the US,
Putin by the International courts,
reputable scientists by their governing bodies and the presstitutes,
any and all dissenters by social media (and increasingly by the criminal courts),
the victims of Covid measures and vaccination harm by social media, Big Pharma and the medical establishment…
…is the same totalitarian, globalist drive; perpetrated by the same totalitarian, globalist scum.
Dissenters are roadblocks on their march toward their totalitarian delusion.
Making the law meaningless is their most important step on the road.
The first victim of totalitarianism is always justice.
I want to leave you with some questions:
How can we expect a supreme court to dispense justice if one of their ‘justices’ is so detached from reality that she cannot even define what a woman is?
How can we expect ‘justice’ served by political appointees?
The United Arab Emirates (where Pavel Durov is a citizen and permanent resident) froze a deal worth 17 billion dollars with France in protest of this abuse of power.
What kind of a twisted world are we living in where a Muslim elective monarchy has to teach a lesson in human rights to the land of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité?
Like everything else on Substack, this is a reader supported publication.
You can help it by following or subscribing.
You can engage with it by clicking on like and/or commenting.
A ‘like’ costs nothing and is worth a lot.
You can help this Stack grow by sharing, recommending, quoting or referencing it.
You can support it by pledging your financial support.
Any and all of it will be much appreciated.
Great article. If you haven't read the work of Solzhenitsyn, I recommend it. The fact of the matter is that totalitarian rule always requires some veneer of "justice" to function. In the soviet union, and the soviet provinces of Canada, the court system becomes a political weapon. It is far safer to be a run-of-the-mill felon than it is to be a political dissident. It's the dissidents who are targeted while the cities are burnt to the ground by regular looters. Dissidents represent a threat to the powerful, run-of-the-mill murderers don't. The new truth is that the Dissident Right is in ascendance and it will either be crushed (see the UK) or it will re-seize the levers of political power.
At some point soon, it seems likely that a targeted political dissident will decide that they're more likely to find truth and justice in the court of public opinion by active revolt than through a court judge and court-appointed defense. That calculus is run every time some one gets arrested for speech or thought-crimes... and in some places it no longer makes sense to accept state authority and coercion when attacked.