JUSTICE VERSUS THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS

This week a Manitoba judge put another nail in the coffin of the
rights and freedoms of ordinary people living in our neighbourhood.

The judge used the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to protect some guys
with 12 crack rocks, a loaded, high-powered handgun and about $1,700
cash in their car.

She scolded the officer who confiscated the goods and set the other
guys free. I'm figuring, at this rate, she might as well also have
returned their gun, drugs and cash.

It's obvious that judge rendered justice in the cloistered environs of
a courtroom, very far from the mean streets of the West End.

Would that judge be as convinced of the "rights" of those guys if she
suspected them of selling drugs to a member of her family?

Would it make a difference if she knew the parents whose kids would be
the recipients of those crack rocks or possibly even one of the
bullets from that loaded gun?

Would she still scold the cop?

Back in the neighbourhood, it seems that the courts spend more time
defending crooks with the charter than defending our community from
the crooks. Presumption of innocence has turned into a denial of
obvious guilt.

Hoodlums don't give a rip about our charter rights, but they'll
quickly duck behind their own charter rights when it suits them.

If most citizens knew how hard it is to convict someone in court
they'd be sick!

I regularly get calls from others in my neighbourhood complaining
about obvious drug houses. The steady procession of bicycle couriers,
cars, cabs, and strung-out addicts make it painfully obvious what's
happening. Neighbours constantly see money and small packages changing
hands on a regular basis. They live with the noise, the traffic, and
the fear.

So they call the cops. But they falsely assume that cops will be able
to move quickly to bust the dealers. Cops know the tell-tale signs
even better than most of us. But they also know that there's a huge
difference between knowing that people are doing something illegal and
proving it in court.

I was reviewing this ongoing frustration with someone in the
neighbourhood this week. And I think I finally understand the problem.
I've often seen that statue representing justice. It's the one where
the blindfolded lady is holding the scales of justice.

Maybe judges have misunderstood the statue. I'm sure the artist
intended the blindfold to encourage the rendering of impartial
judgment, not the denial of reality on the streets.

I'm thinking some judges ought to remove the blinders on occasion and
take a closer look at what's going on out here.

Maybe they can remove their blindfold long enough to strap on their
"Charter" and come live in our neighbourhood for awhile.

In my neighbourhood the charter is used to cloak the crooks and
handcuff the cops.

In my neighbourhood the charter is abused daily by the same guys the
judge defends when they finally arrive in court.

There's nothing wrong with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But
there's something wrong about the vacuum in which it's applied and the
way it seemingly shields obvious criminals, drug dealers and outright
thugs.

I guess it's all a matter of context.

I took a quick look at the charter, and I'm grateful my kids didn't
have a copy of this document when they were younger.

If the charter applied to parenting:

I've occasionally violated their freedom to peaceful assembly with
some friends;

I've sometimes curtailed their freedom of association ("not while
you're under this roof");

I've infringed on their rights of mobility ("you're
grounded");

I've not provided explanations of house rules in both official
languages;

I've conducted what some might consider unreasonable search or
seizure;

I'm sure they may sometimes have complained that my punishment was
cruel and unusual -- despite the fact that it was a plain ordinary
spanking;

I've used incriminating evidence from one "offence" to bolster
concerns on other issues;

I've commonly deprived them of their rights to "counsel," bail or a
jury of their peers.

Don't get me wrong! I've got real good kids.

But I don't think they'd have turned out this way if I blindly applied
the Charter of Rights and Freedoms without due consideration of our
context; without an equal expectation of respect and
responsibility.

I was thinking of offering that judge an apartment in our
neighbourhood for awhile. A change of context might be helpful.
Actually, it might help if all judges got their noses out of the
charter long enough to smell the fear and mess on our streets.

To be fair, that judge has also made some good decisions. I've
witnessed her administer a balance of justice and mercy in a context
of common sense. But this time her decision was whacked. I hope she
does better next time.

Back to my kids, I know sometimes they read this column. It leads me
to wonder if there's a statute of limitations on charter violations.
I'm wondering what would happen if they called and asked the courts to
address my past charter violations.

If the courts don't consider the context, I'm sure I could be in
trouble.

If I get that same judge, she may just lock me up and throw away the
key.