LAZY JUSTICE ENDANGERS US ALL

Yukon residents clearly want action to curb the territory's growing
drug problem.

But the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Act isn't the solution
everyone had hoped for.

In fact the law, which was hastily cobbled together and passed in the
spring in anticipation of October's territorial election, is proving
to be a dangerous bit of work.

Here's why.

This week, the government forced the eviction of some people living in
a trailer in the Kopper King neighbourhood, the first such action
under the new law.

"All we're concerned about with the safer communities legislation is
to stop the activity," said Justice spokesman Dan Cable.

But if you look at how the so-called SCAN law worked this week, the
government wasn't concerned about stopping any drug-related activity
at all.

Because of SCAN, the drug activity will now just move somewhere
else.

Here's how it worked.

The SCAN office received an anonymous complaint from someone. It could
have been an elderly neighbour or a savvy drug dealer trying to
eliminate a rival, we don't know.

Beyond that, there's little information.

We assume the SCAN office's secret pseudopolice staked out the house
to see what was going on.

Apparently, they determined that something was "probably" going
on.

And, in investigators' opinions, it was adversely affecting the
neighbourhood.

How? Justice officials haven't said.

But they approached the landlord. And working with them, the
government evicted the tenants. Neighbourhood problem solved, neat and
tidy.

No formal police investigation was needed to force the eviction. In
fact, police weren't involved at all.

There were no warrants, no evidence and, apparently, no crime. As of
today, no charges have been laid.

Just an eviction notice.

Justice officials have not specified why these people were evicted,
other than to say they were "probably" possessing, producing, using,
consuming, selling, transferring, exchanging or trafficking a
controlled substance.

It could have been a small baggie of pot or a brick of coke. Justice
officials won't say, though clearly there are different levels of concern.

They also won't say who was evicted -- their identities are protected
under privacy legislation.

Besides, this wasn't a criminal investigation -- where they would be
identified if charged -- so government officials are being very
careful. If they identified someone, they might provoke a defamation
lawsuit.

But, because these people have not been identified, they will simply
mosey along to the next landlord. The problem, if indeed there was
one, has simply shifted from one house to another.

If, of course, the renters can find a place -- the market is pretty
tight.

To help these people cope with their new circumstances (officials
haven't said how many people were living there, whether any were
children or women and if they were all involved in the illicit
activity), the government handed them a notice.

It is 91 words long.

It spells out what social assistance is. "This program is to be used
as a last resort only, after all other possible sources have been
explored," it reads, in part.

It also gives the address of alcohol and drug services. And two phone
numbers to call for information.

After the News asked for, and received, a copy of this handout,
officials drafted a new, more comprehensive list. They delivered it to
the trailer's residents the next day.

This alone raises questions about whether Justice officials were ready
to initiate such action. It suggests they wanted an outcome, without
considering its implications.

In fact, in evicting the people the government is breaking its own
law.

The Yukon's Landlord and Tenant Act prevents a landlord from evicting
someone in December, January or February without 14 days notice.

Why? Because it's dangerous being homeless in the Yukon in the dead of
winter. These people have five days to line up new digs.

How can the government break its own law? Because SCAN is very
powerful -- it trumps the landlord act.

Can the evicted appeal?

Nope.

Because it was handled outside the courts, there is no process for
them to appeal the decision.

Can the accused access the evidence used against them?

Nope, not allowed.

The safer communities act's secret pseudopolice have wide-ranging
powers to collect health and employment records, conduct surveillance
and gather all sorts of other information on people, but that data is
for their eyes only.

It is not available to the accused or their lawyers after it is
collected. Unless, of course, the accused take it to court and
successfully argue for its release.

So there are many troubling issues surrounding this shoddy Yukon
law.

And it probably violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms.

"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person
and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the
principles of fundamental justice," reads the national Charter.

As well, "any person charged with an offence has the right =85 to be
presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and
public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal."

Though not challenged in court, it would appear the Yukon SCAN
legislation violates these two principles, if not more.

It passed the legislature because the public was frustrated about the
drug problem and wanted action.

The SCAN legislation, proposed by the NDP and passed by the Yukon
Party, is a backdoor, a dodge around Canada's established common law,
derived from centuries of judgments by working jurists.

The Yukon legislation ignores established citizen rights and laws. And
because of that, it's grievously flawed.

It is lazy justice.

And lazy justice is not justice at all.