Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
News (Media Awareness Project) - CN NK: Editorial: Freedom Must Be Protected
Title:CN NK: Editorial: Freedom Must Be Protected
Published On:2008-08-14
Source:Times & Transcript (Moncton, CN NK)
Fetched On:2008-08-15 18:23:14
FREEDOM MUST BE PROTECTED

In Moncton Tuesday, Provincial Court Judge Irwin Lampert rendered a
decision in a drug possession for the purpose of trafficking case,
finding a police search of a suspect's vehicle legal, then bluntly
inviting the defence to appeal his ruling because judges are split on
whether police tactics are constitutional or not.

It may be unusual, but Judge Lampert is correct. The matter needs to
be clarified. It goes to the very heart of our freedoms and
constitutional rights.

A democracy isn't worth much if everyone's rights and freedom are not
respected and constitutional protections are not applied equally to
all, including criminals and others who for some reason may seem suspicious.

At the heart of this and other recent cases locally are the actions of
a single RCMP officer whose methods have raised many legal eyebrows.
Police are supposed to have reasonable grounds or just cause to stop
people and conduct searches. But where, exactly, are the lines drawn
between reasonable and unreasonable; just and unjust?

The officer in these particular cases has been stopping vehicles (are
these random stops or reasonable?) for alleged traffic violations
although often it turns out there was none. Once stopped, and if
papers check out, the citizens are told they are free to go, but asked
if they'd mind answering a few questions. Why? This is the start of a
fishing expedition with no grounds or just cause. If the officer gets
suspicious during the questioning, the person is asked if a search can
be conducted? Are the suspicions, created by his own questions,
reasonable grounds? What degree of intimidation is going on here
simply by the fact the citizen is dealing with an armed police officer
and is alone on the side of a highway? Many people would say "yes, go
ahead and search" simply because they fear what might happen should
they say "no," as is their right.

In our opinion, the judges who have ruled that this violates
constitutional rights are correct. Canadians should be protected from
this sort of thing.

And there is good reason. The potential for abuse of the tactics, even
if it is not happening locally, is enormous. Our freedoms and rights
are far too important to allow such violations simply to collar a few
extra drug dealers or other criminals.
Member Comments
No member comments available...