Almost everything western Governments have done for the last 31 months has been illegal. Western Voters found out the hard way that laws are for the little people. Our current crop of politicians and government Bureaucrats do not believe that their actions should ever be constrained by law. Their deluded sense of moral superiority makes everything they do not just legal but also virtuous. It does not matter how many people you harm or even kill when your goal is noble.
Unfortunately for citizens of western nations our courts have consistently failed us. They have either sided with unlawful governments or avoided the issue out of cowardice. Some judges even participated in their own illegal behavior arbitrarily imposing their own COVID restrictions. Absolute power does corrupt absolutely.
Thankfully that seems to be changing. I don’t know what woke them up but some courts are actually doing their jobs. Last week a Spanish court found lockdown restrictions were illegal and yesterday a New York court over ruled the state’s vaccine mandate. In its ruling the New York court stated;
“States of emergency are meant to be temporary,”
This simple statement is obvious to most but no doubt Canadian politicians will be confused by it. To Canadian politicians states of emergencies are just another tool used to bypass inconvenient laws. This is not that surprising from a country where the prime minister uses a “charitable” foundation to bypass corruption and bribery laws.
Corruption in Canada starts in the Prime Minister’s office and seeps down in to every institution including the courts. The whole thing is carefully stage managed to maintain a façade of accountability for a thoroughly corrupt system. Currently there is a public inquiry in Canada over Justin Trudeau’s emergency declaration. This was the declaration Justin used to justify trampling elderly Freedom Convoy protesters with horses.
As always in Canada this inquiry is just theatre designed to convince Canadians that law and order exists when it really does not. The inquiry has gone on for weeks now and mostly consists of people testifying about whether they were inconvenienced or upset by the most peaceful protest in Canadian history. The stage is being set to declare that an illegal emergency declaration was justified because of inconvenience.
That is what makes this inquiry such a farce. The central question of the illegality of the emergency declaration is being ignored. The Emergencies act is very clear as to when it can be used.
3 For the purposes of this Act, a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that
(a) seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it, or
(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada
So the legal bar to invoke the act is potential for mass casualties or a threat to Canadian sovereignty. There is no way in hell the freedom Convoy cleared that very high bar. It does not matter how many people were inconvenienced or upset. There was no violence at all and no invading army. Justin Trudeau’s cozy relationship with communist China is way more of a threat to national sovereignty than the freedom convoy ever was.
This inquiry is the same scripted theatre that the Gomery inquiry was. For those young or non-Canadians the Gomery inquiry happened when Prime Minister Chretien got caught funneling millions of dollars to Liberal friendly business for non-existent work. He even funneled some of the money in to his own bank account. He gave money to a business associate who gave it back to Chretien through a golf course purchase. When the dust settled no one was punished for stealing tax money. The inquiry was all sound and fury signifying nothing.
I expect the same result from this current inquiry. It will conclude that the prime minister did nothing wrong even though he clearly broke the law. A country does not have rule of law just because they have laws. If those laws are not applied equally, rule of law does not exist. It does not matter how many inquiries you hold.