babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Student strike - lockout and repression #8

114 replies [Last post]

Comments

bouchecl
Offline
Joined: Sep 10 2009

NDPP wrote:

I don't see how the bill can stand. It so clearly attacks Charter rights to assembly, association, freedom of speech -  some unions or lawyers need to go to court and take it down asap.

FECQ is preparing a court challenge but the government doesn't care since it will take years for the case to get through the courts.


6079_Smith_W
Online
Joined: Jun 10 2010

It might take some time to resolve it, but they could possibly get an injunction quicker than that, no? That proposed law in incredibly invasive.

 


bouchecl
Offline
Joined: Sep 10 2009

Priceless. The Gatineau Chamber of Commerce sent a snarky letter to Gatineau police about a demonstration by 10 or more persons on May 29. The president, Antoine Normand, describes the event (they're giving a prize to a local outfit) and asks for the number of infiltration agents in order to plan for enough hors-d'oeuvres. Sealed. Even though the limit has been raised to 25 demonstrators, this shows the kind of atmosphere in Quebec this morning.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

NDPP wrote:

I don't see how the bill can stand. It so clearly attacks Charter rights to assembly, association, freedom of speech -  some unions or lawyers need to go to court and take it down asap.

Sorry NDPP that is just naive.  The HEU and the Teachers in BC had their Charter rights destroyed by the BC Liberals.  It took 6 years to get to the Supreme Court where they "won." The Judges told the government it had overstepped its boundaries and breached the Charter and it had to sit down and negotiate the items that had been illegally stripped out in breach of the Charter.  As in FN's land claims the SCC has only ever ordered a government to consult and negotiate when it has breached the Charter rights of unions.

It would be nice if a Judge would rule that the law cannot take effect until the Charter arguments are heard but I am not going to hold my breath waiting. However in my experience it is a lot easier to convince a Judge to grant an injunction against protestors than it is to get one against a corporation or government.


6079_Smith_W
Online
Joined: Jun 10 2010

Hard to say.... it happened with Insite. It happened with the Wheat Board. It happened with registry records. 

And considering how far this law goes it may happen again.

 


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

Yes, all true, one tries to be hopeful in such matters..


kim elliott
Offline
Joined: May 2 2008

Just popping in for a share (found on facebook): 


[image fixed by moderator]


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Not being able to protest does not meet any of the tests of harm to the parties seeking the injunctive relief. Closing Insite had the potential to cause death. How does being told not to demonstrate compare to that?

The Charter challenges will come when the law is enforced and then a Judge might strike it down like they did with medical marijuana.


Bärlüer
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 2007

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Hard to say.... it happened with Insite. It happened with the Wheat Board. It happened with registry records. 

And considering how far this law goes it may happen again.

I don't believe there was an injunction in the Insite case. They started the action as the expiry of the required extensions loomed.

In the Wheat Board case, it didn't happen—the judge rejected the attempt to suspend the law ending the Wheat Board's monopoly.

It did happen in the case of the registry records.

All that to say that it is very hard to get the court to suspend the execution of a validly enacted law. In Harper v. Canada (in which Harper challenged third-party spending limits), the Supreme Court writes: 

Quote:
Another principle set out in the cases is that in considering the grant of an interlocutory injunction suspending the operation of a validly enacted but challenged law, it is wrong to insist on proof that the law will produce a public good.  Rather, at this stage of the proceeding, this is presumed.

[...]

The assumption of the public interest in enforcing the law  weighs heavily in the balance.  Courts will not lightly order that laws that Parliament or a legislature has duly enacted for the public good are inoperable in advance of complete constitutional review, which is always a complex and difficult matter. It follows that only in clear cases will interlocutory injunctions against the enforcement of a law on grounds of alleged unconstitutionality succeed. 

This is hard to overcome.


6079_Smith_W
Online
Joined: Jun 10 2010

@ kropotkin 

True. I guess my real point is that I don't think every judge will be swayed by the fact this involves reining in the government.

(edit)

and @ Baerlueer

I guess Insite wasn't an injunction, but it was a court decision to extend Insite's exemption from the law which, as became clear as soon it was announced, the feds would most certainly removed when the deadline passed. It amounts to a pre-emptive version of  the same thing - government being stopped by the courts.

And you're right about the wheat board. My mistake.

And I agree it may be hard to overcome. But harsh restrictions on freedom of assembly might just do it.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Thx Barluer.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Joint press release of the three major union federations (CSN, FTQ, CSQ):

A law which attacks civil liberties and threatens our democracy

 


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

The bylaw banning masks at protests has just passed in Montreal.

 


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Boom Boom wrote:

The bylaw banning masks at protests has just passed in Montreal.

 

It's important to note that this is not just about masks. The first part of the bylaw bans any assemblly, march, or gathering where the exact place and route has not been previously communicated to the police. In that sense, it's almost identical to provincial Bill 78, which is now being rammed through the National Assembly, except that it doesn't even provide the minimum of 10 (or 25, if and when 78 is amended) participants. Nor does it say who has to notify the police. The fines are less - that's all.

Here is the letter which the Québec bar association sent the city to warn it of the aspects of the bylaw that are contrary to civil liberties and open to challenge.

The police have been complaining for years about demos where they're not informed of the route in advance. That has been the feature of almost all the daily student marches. Now they've been declared illegal, in advance, without even bothering to wait for the fascist provincial law to be "adopted".

Too much is happening. People aren't paying attention. It's not easy when you're under attack from every single quarter.

 


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Cry


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Breaking news:

Amir Khadir will address the media in 15 minutes on the issue of "obedience to the Special Act".

And Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, of CLASSE, had also mentioned that they were considering hte question of civil disobedience, and he would be commenting on it this afternoon.

What's up!!??


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

The children cannot be abandoned in their courageous fight against our descent into tyranny,

Quote:

1) THE IAIOFLAUTAS STRIKE AGAIN…#enelinteriordeinterior (inside the Home Office)

The elder activists group iaiaoflautas has  been back in action this week: on April 26th they occupied the entrance  hall to the Home Office Department’s for the autonomous government of  Catalonia. The iaioflautas were  condemning the increasing repression in Catalonia, and they asked to  talk to the local Home Office minister, Felip Puig. Finally they were  able to talk to the Home Office’s Secretary General.

In the manifesto that the “iaios” (familiar word for grandparents) read out they condemn:

  • The  Home Office’s penal code reform plan in order to extend the  anti-terrorism law, limitating the right to meetings, preventive  detentions, encouragement to inform on others, and a general hardening  of the penal code.
  • The police repression against the 29M strikers, where several  people were arrested. Especially the Mossos d’Esquadra’s (Catalan  auotnomical police) behaviour, arresting people arbitrarily, identifying  en masse during pacific concentrations, arresting and emprisioning   sindicalists on remand and promoting citizen denunciation through a  specific website and by asking the universities’ vice-chancellors for  lists of students who participate in university assemblies. 
  • The unfair and incredible imprisonment without trial of Isma,  Dani and Javi for participating in a student picket on the 29M, and more  recently of the sindacalist Laura

The  only explanation that they found to this is that the power is scared  and trying to frighten people from protesting for their rights. The iaioflautas would like  to say that they are not scared and they will keep fighting for the  rights that they fought for and gained when young, as now they can’t  bare to see those rights trampled upon.

http://www.peoplesassemblies.org/tag/iaioflautas/


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

Unionist wrote:

Too much is happening. People aren't paying attention. It's not easy when you're under attack from every single quarter.

NDPP

Not easy but essential...


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Quebec students say Charest's authoritarian 'special law' will fail

Quote:
The 24,000-member Bar Association of Quebec has spoken against Bill 78. Among its concerns is the provision that the education minister may rule by decree on education matters, bypassing the National Assembly, including ordering education institutions to withhold the transfer of membership dues to student organizations.

Leaders of the unions of university and CEGEP (junior college) professors (the FQPPU and FNEEQ, respectively) as well as the large, trade union centrals have also condemned the measure.

Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois of the CLASSE student federation called the law, "repressive and authoritarian. It restricts students' right to strike, which has been recognized for years by educational institutions."

His colleague, Jeanne Reynolds, says the law is a "losing proposition" coming from a "haughty and arrogant" Premier Jean Charest. Both leaders reaffirmed the mass protest for May 22, saying, "No law will stop us from demonstrating."

A mass, student protest in Montreal on May 22 that is already planned by the three largest students associations on strike will assuredly be even larger than the tens of thousands of participants already anticipated.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

Quebec's Anti-Protest Legislation Tramples Basic Rights: Legal Experts

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/quebecs-anti-protest-legisl...

"This bill, if adopted, is a breach to the fundamental, constitutional rights of the citizens,' the bar association president, batonnier Louise Masson, said in a statement. 'The government is making it harder for people to organize spontaneous demonstrations. This is a limit on freedom of speech,' Mr Masson said.

'Read it. Stunned. Can't believe that a democratic government can adopt such a law,' tweeted law professor Louis Philippe Lampron, a Laval University expert in human rights..."


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Petition: www.loi78.com


bouchecl
Offline
Joined: Sep 10 2009

Catchfire wrote:

Petition: www.loi78.com

This is NOT a petition. This is part of FECQ application to declare Bill 78 null and void and this page is used to recruit applicants for the lawsuit.  So, if you don't have a standing before a Quebec court, please don't add your name there.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Thanks, bouchecl, you beat me to the punch - I wanted to say the same thing. In fact, it looks as if that page is still being modified. Yesterday, there were dead links to Juripop and less information on it - it didn't even mention FECQ originally. Everyone's acting fast these days, and I don't blame them.

 


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Amir Khadir calls for mass discussion on peaceful civil disobedience to Bill 78. My translations follow:

Amir Khadir wrote:
We call upon all social partners, popular groups, civil society groups, the Québec Bar Association, intellectuals, engaged artists, environmentalists, and trade unions to reflect together about the possibility of disobeying this law in a peaceful manner.

Please read the whole article.

Of particular interest: Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, CLASSE co-spokesperson and Most Hated Person of Jean Charest's government, is facing contempt of court charges for having made the following totally innocent remarks on RDI (French equivalent of CBC News Network - only difference is that it's actually worth watching) on May 13:

Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois wrote:

Je crois qu'il est tout à fait légitime pour les étudiants et les étudiantes de prendre les moyens qui s'imposent pour faire respecter le choix démocratique qui a été fait d'aller en grève. C'est tout à fait regrettable qu'il y ait une minorité d'étudiants et d'étudiantes qui utilisent les tribunaux pour contourner la décision collective qui a été prise. Donc, je trouve cela tout à fait légitime que les gens prennent les moyens nécessaires pour faire respecter le vote de grève et si ça prend des lignes de piquetage, on croit que c'est un moyen tout à fait légitime de le faire.

Amir Khadir adopts these comments as his own and calls on other MNAs and ordinary citizens to do likewise - thus creating a "moral safety zone" to protect Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois!

If you want to know why Amir Khadir is my hero, you need look no further than this.

ETA: Here's my translation of Gabriel's comments, just so you can see how far fascism is going in Québec in the past few days:

Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois wrote:
I believe that it is completely legitimate for the students to use the necessary means to ensure that the democratic choice of going on strike is respected. It is totally regrettable that a minority of students are using the courts to overturn that collective decision. Thus, I consider it entirely legitimate that people use the necessary means to ensure that the strike vote is respected, and if it takes picket lines, then we think that's a completely legitimate means.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

Bravo! Even I might consider voting for a politician like this..

may this contagion go forth and prosper...


Bärlüer
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 2007

The Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse (how apt at this juncture that the two are brought together...) has published a press release about Bill 78.

They don't go in much detail as they intend to do a full analysis of the bill, but they do mention that it raises "serious concerns" with respect to fundamental rights and freedoms. They also invite the legislature to act with caution and to assume its responsibilities in a way that respects the fundamental rights and freedoms.


lagatta
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2002

Woohoo! 40 years ago Bourassa was "Boubou" when the Libs jailed the three labour confederation presidents and many more trade unionists after they defied such a law and continued the general strike in favour of the Common Front struggle.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

By making some cosmetic changes (raising the 10-person limit to 50, getting rid of some of the reverse onus, allowing people to choose the location of the demo (though not the route), and removing some of the most obscene aspects of section 29), the Charest government has predictably purchased the support of CAQ.

Which reminds me... eternal shame on the cowardly traitor François Rebello, one-time president of the university students' federation (FEUQ), who left the PQ for CAQ and now I would imagine is enjoying the good life with dollar bills stuffed up his ass. He votes for this bill. May his betrayal haunt him forever.

ETA: Guess I should mention that the evil law has now been adopted. 

 


cco
Offline
Joined: Apr 25 2005
It's passed. 68-48. I don't even know what to say.

NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

Quebec Emergency Law An Attack on Freedom of Assembly and Expression, Say Critics  -  by Tim McSorley

http://montreal.mediacoop.ca/story/quebec-emergency-law-attack-freedom-a...

"...If we are no longer able to protest in our socieity, it becomes a totalitarian society,' said Louis Roy, head of the Confederation des Syndicats Nationeux (CSN) which represents most university and college teachers in the province. "We are telling our members to defend their fundamental right, the right to demonstrate', he added.

When asked whether wearing a red square in class would violate the law, Education Minister Michelle Courchesne said that would be up to the courts to decide. Should the government not change route and negotiate with student leaders, all signs point to a continued strike and a very large demonstration on May 22."


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments