Juno News - Still no proof Emergencies Act was necessary (ft. Keith Wilson)

00:00:00.000 I'm going to bring into the discussion in just a moment's time Keith Wilson who is a lawyer

00:00:13.340 extraordinary King's Counsel the first King's Counsel I've ever met because he was the first

00:00:17.760 to change from the QC that he had had for so many years. Keith it's good to talk to you thanks for

00:00:23.440 coming on today. Thanks for having me on Andrew. So let me start first off with this business

00:00:29.740 with Doug Ford here. Why on earth is it that the Premier would have to be summonsed to appear

00:00:37.740 when just last week he was saying yeah I'm all for appearing I'm all for coming they just haven't

00:00:42.120 asked yet? Well he's given the answer with the judicial review you mentioned that he doesn't

00:00:47.900 want to testify and that of course raises some interesting questions. What is he worried that

00:00:53.400 he's going to be asked? What is he worried that he might have to answer? This is very surprising

00:01:00.720 even to me who as you can imagine with all the things I've been through I've got a pretty high

00:01:05.520 threshold for surprise and this one trips it handily. Yeah I mean I would say that as far as

00:01:12.760 people that we could benefit from hearing from here the Ontario government will be a fascinating

00:01:18.060 one because this was the government that had to grapple with the Ambassador Bridge blockade and

00:01:23.720 it's the government that managed to clear up that blockade without the Emergencies Act using regular

00:01:28.740 policing powers just in a matter of about 48 hours. So I actually think hearing from Premier Ford about

00:01:35.160 why you couldn't just apply what you did there to Ottawa would be a fascinating revelation for the

00:01:41.620 Commission. Well and for all of us I mean what's what's striking is compared to something else the

00:01:48.680 the Premier Ford's position as we now have learned in the last number of hours which is compared to the

00:01:54.280 position of the Prime Minister. Doug Ford was not a decision maker with respect to the invocation of

00:01:59.500 the Emergencies Act. The Prime Minister was and he's expressed a willingness to to testify is not

00:02:06.720 requiring to be subpoenaed he's coming under his own volition I think he realized he had no

00:02:11.240 choice but you know why Premier Ford would do this to himself he's likely to lose his judicial review

00:02:20.560 just because the case law is so clear he's not precluded from invoking a privilege when he's asked

00:02:27.900 a question if the question triggers privilege so this is bad political strategy in my view he would

00:02:35.940 have been better off to just say yeah I'm happy to come and share whatever mission I have and

00:02:40.240 help Canadians get to the bottom of this it's a very important inquiry and happy to be here instead

00:02:45.460 he's just he's just embroiled himself in a self-imposed controversy. When we talk about the witnesses that

00:02:53.260 are slated to appear we've got members of the convoys board we've got more police representatives we've got

00:03:00.840 some bureaucrats from all number of federal departments and intelligence agencies we've got federal

00:03:05.700 cabinet ministers I know that this is fluid and more witnesses could be added here we also have

00:03:12.060 that statutory cutoff where the report has to be tabled by by February and I'm wondering is it

00:03:18.680 possible to cast too wide a net here and bring in more people than are needed for the commissioner to

00:03:24.180 make the decision or is your view that this witness list is actually so light that key details are being

00:03:29.560 amissed? Well the you're right that it's a it's a dynamic process the witness list that everyone's seen was the

00:03:37.180 first preliminary witness list there will be a new witness list coming out soon and it will have a lot more

00:03:45.540 names on it and that's the nature of this process we've been working with the commission's lawyers on on expanding the

00:03:53.340 number of witnesses that will speak on behalf of the freedom convoy protesters uh so it is and and the

00:03:59.400 other thing that's happening here is which is really unusual for lawyers anyway is that normally before you

00:04:06.080 go into something like this all the documents are disclosed and you have a chance to review them

00:04:10.040 we're getting new documents disclosed every day and the last count we had we were uh we were over 15,000

00:04:19.000 records over 20,000 well over 20,000 pages of documents so um the the the paper evidence just

00:04:27.900 keeps coming in by the day that depending on our review of it and what we find and other parties finds

00:04:33.520 then triggers a request so for example one of the things that that our group and a number of other

00:04:38.800 lawyers representing other groups made a formal application uh last week late last week to have

00:04:45.620 the commissioner issue a subpoena to the head of the cbc to testify because one of the focuses in the

00:04:52.460 order in council for this public inquiry is to examine misinformation and disinformation and given

00:04:59.900 that we couldn't understand why the head of the cbc wasn't at the top of the witness list so um we know

00:05:06.500 that mendocino and other ministers have routinely referred to fake news stories as a basis of their

00:05:14.140 decision making so this uh inquiry has been fascinating since the first day as you note

00:05:20.520 we're on day eight of 38 days of of evidence we still have at least 30 days to go assuming we don't

00:05:27.420 start sitting saturdays and i think we're going to start sitting the hearing on saturdays very soon

00:05:31.720 just on a on a this is not a question that's coming from anywhere but my own mind here

00:05:37.340 is there a mechanism at all to delay the production of the report if for some reason they need more

00:05:45.220 time for hearings they need more witnesses more time to put it all together or is that a complete

00:05:50.340 no-go under the statute well the what's the statute the statute simple says that you have to table your

00:05:58.440 report before the legislatures of the provinces uh and the parliament of canada and the senate

00:06:03.620 within 365 days of the revocation of the invocation okay so that puts us into february next year

00:06:11.640 as to whether or not the commissioner decides so he's got two blocks of time left hearing time

00:06:17.340 and then review and writing time he may decide to chop a week or two off of his his writing time

00:06:25.080 for him and his commission staff and and extend the hearing um the only other i've been asked this

00:06:31.520 question many times the only other situation would be if the parliament and the senate decide to amend

00:06:38.780 the emergencies act to modify section 63 and change it from 365 days to some other number

00:06:46.760 so um uh we can all guess at what the mechanics of that might be but the commissioner is uh running a

00:06:54.440 very tight ship uh we put in a request each day by five o'clock for the witnesses we're going to be

00:07:00.320 cross-examining three days from now and that's the rule we do every day we're working seven days a week

00:07:04.720 uh many many hours a day and night um and we have to identify all of the documents that we're going to

00:07:11.960 put to the witness in cross so we would have identified uh interim chief bell what i guess on

00:07:18.320 friday of last week um and then we so we may say we need an hour and a half to cross-examine

00:07:24.800 interim chief bell and then the commissioner will say you get 15 minutes or you get 10 minutes or

00:07:29.980 you get 20 minutes so that's how it works for all the parties and uh and he's got a stop clock up

00:07:36.240 there as you probably noticed he'll sometimes let you run over a little bit but he's running a pretty

00:07:41.360 tight ship and um uh you know right now we're assuming we're going to finish on time and but we're

00:07:47.940 very much alive to the fact that in the next couple of weeks we'll probably be sitting on saturdays and

00:07:52.720 holding the hearing on saturdays as well as going till eight and nine o'clock each night

00:07:56.820 i want to play a very brief clip here from uh today this is brendan miller representing

00:08:02.540 uh freedom corp uh during his cross-examination of interim chief bell earlier today talking about

00:08:09.020 this idea of there being a plan by police without the emergencies act last question just because i just

00:08:16.960 want to get this clear but so you're saying that there was existing laws that you could have done

00:08:21.340 the same thing under is that right we had a plan we were going to execute a plan thank you

00:08:27.420 very clear question you had existing laws the interim chief says there was a plan we had a plan

00:08:33.640 uh you know when when these sorts of revelations came out last week there was a part of me that

00:08:38.040 wondered if you know in very dramatic hollywood-like fashion brendan miller could just say i rest my case

00:08:44.120 nothing further and go home because really that seems to be inherently inherently disqualifying for

00:08:51.440 the emergencies act the way the act is written well when brendan uh and you know we're thrilled

00:08:57.280 to have him leading our team and being the lead barrister uh that was to be my job but after i

00:09:03.420 assessed brendan's skills and the role that i'm taking in this inquiry and the fact that i'm likely to

00:09:08.060 testify it simply wasn't proper to have me be the barrister um but brendan's doing a terrific job

00:09:14.500 but when he did his opening statement you'll recall andrew that he was very straightforward and he laid

00:09:20.600 out here's the four things that you that that that the government has to establish you know that there

00:09:26.740 was acts of sabotage or or espionage there will be no evidence of espionage there will be uh that they

00:09:33.980 have to establish that there was threats of serious violence against persons and property there will

00:09:38.240 be no evidence and he went through the list in his opening statement he reframed his opening statement

00:09:44.380 at a cross-examination questions when he interviewed the head of the opp's intelligence unit um and he

00:09:51.560 answered each one of them you know in the negative there what there there's no evidence of serious

00:09:57.660 violence against property there was no evidence of insurrection there was no evidence of of uh of terrorist

00:10:03.140 activity all of these requirements so after that cross-examination last week of the head of the

00:10:09.040 opp's intelligence uh group we we we did kind of joke well you know time to pack our bags and head home

00:10:16.640 to our families but of course we got to see this thing out and we will because it's not just the legal

00:10:22.580 test that's at issue here it's the narrative and i'm really concerned about this element of

00:10:28.340 misinformation disinformation because in my view having cross-examined all the various government

00:10:34.140 experts um and officials on the peckford case with respect to the justifications for the mandates and

00:10:40.060 the vaccine approval process and all of these other issues i know where the disinformation is

00:10:45.760 it's it's it's from the government and so there's there's other narratives that need to be explored and

00:10:51.980 exposed and it's going to continue to be a fascinating inquiry in my view you mentioned the the peckford case

00:10:58.240 you and i have spoken about this in the past and i covered the uh hearing that took place on the

00:11:03.960 federal government's application to dismiss the whole thing as moot because in their words the

00:11:07.980 mandates were gone you don't need to be vaccinated to get on a plane case closed and it was quite

00:11:14.020 disheartening the other day when the federal court justice the associate chief justice uh approved that

00:11:19.580 she granted that motion she said this is moot reasons have not yet been published here but uh even

00:11:24.880 though the federal government in its own language has said this was a temporary suspension they've

00:11:30.820 managed to essentially convince the federal court of this country that it's not worth hearing whether

00:11:36.800 that mandate was unconstitutional to begin with now i know uh premier peckford maxine bernier uh some

00:11:42.640 of the other applicants as well i believe have said they're going to appeal this but i was wondering if

00:11:47.900 you could explain in the absence of decisions why you think that went the way it did in the absence of

00:11:52.740 reasons rather well i mean i hate to be cynical but i have no choice given what i've seen and it's just

00:12:02.700 clear to me when you look at the decisions of our courts at the provincial level in the federal level

00:12:08.820 they've just been been um unwilling lacking the judicial courage i believe to do the hard analysis

00:12:18.200 um i i i don't feel that uh you know there's the the image of lady justice with the scales of justice

00:12:27.180 and the blindfold the blindfolds probably you know down over her nose right now is how i'm feeling

00:12:34.500 and um uh they're just when you look at the legal test for whether or not to grant a mootness motion

00:12:42.160 you know when there's a serious constitutional issue at play is one of the reasons not to strike

00:12:48.560 out a case for mootness and we have clear uncontroverted evidence that over six million

00:12:56.020 canadians fundamental right of mobility under section six of the charter were grossly violated

00:13:01.080 resulting in them being unable to be at the side of dying loved ones attend funerals be there for their

00:13:08.120 first grandchild to help a loved one be discharged and recover from hospital to go to to weddings and

00:13:15.860 other important celebrations that this was a violation of charter rights on a scale that has

00:13:22.920 never occurred in our history and is almost unimaginable but it happened and for the court to

00:13:29.140 say well you know nothing to see here they they suspended those travel mandates now move along everyone

00:13:37.200 is uh is not helpful um the courts as i said to the judge in my oral argument provide a fundamental

00:13:47.520 role in a modern democracy in a civil society they're the third leg of the stool we have the

00:13:52.640 legislative branch of government we have the executive branch of government and we have the

00:13:56.880 judicial branch of government and they're to perform checks and balances and what's happened with

00:14:01.660 this mootness ruling is the federal court is checked out and that doesn't make the stool more stable

00:14:07.200 i i'm i've remarked on this on the program in the past but when in 2019 the leaders debates commission

00:14:14.280 banned true north and rebel from covering the debate we filed a case for an injunction we won

00:14:20.000 and our longer term case was dismissed as moot and then in 2021 the leaders debates commission does

00:14:26.520 the exact same thing with rebel rebel goes and files another case wins again so as a matter of

00:14:33.700 practicality when there is a significant risk that something like this is going to happen again i think

00:14:38.560 it should be heard but as you've mentioned even if we knew that the mandates were done forever which i

00:14:43.000 wish we could take for granted but we can't this was such a significant breach of canadians rights

00:14:49.780 that it should absolutely have a declaration on record that it was unconstitutional and i i hope that

00:14:56.360 appeal is successful keith i i do just going back very briefly before we let you go to the the public

00:15:02.480 order emergency commission this week we're hearing a bit more from police i just got the the list of

00:15:08.620 expected witnesses for tomorrow we've got russell lucas from the ottawa police service marcel baudin

00:15:13.940 from the opp robert drummond from the ottawa police service are we expecting more of what we've been

00:15:20.360 hearing or do you think that from law enforcement there's still a little bit that could come out that might

00:15:25.120 qualify as a bombshell or a smoking gun to use the popular lingo uh there could be some bombshells in

00:15:31.860 the sense of contradicting uh early test earlier testimony from some of the other police officials

00:15:36.880 but i think we're going to see more of the same you know that i was uh along with tom marazo and

00:15:42.840 eva chipiac we were the ones that there's been a lot of evidence about the negotiations that occurred

00:15:48.020 at city hall and we were the ones in the room and um um we were we we just about had a big success in

00:15:58.760 the early days at sussex and rodeau which was a really tough intersection uh to deal with um given

00:16:04.660 the nature of the people who are protesting there and then we negotiated with the help of former chief

00:16:10.400 chief of staff to premier ford dean french the umbrella deal to actually de-escalate the entire

00:16:16.680 thing just before the invocation of the emergencies act and one of the things that's occurring to us

00:16:22.300 sitting there as eva and i and tom are listening this testimony in real time is that you know we know

00:16:28.440 exactly now why these deals didn't ultimately be successfully implemented it was due completely to

00:16:34.400 policing competence like they just lacked the basic communication competency to place the police in

00:16:43.180 the right places and remove them from other places to allow the deal to be implemented we were constantly

00:16:49.120 blocked by the police and seeing their handwritten notes from the chief's meetings about knowing about

00:16:55.340 the deal and the instructions and their frustration with the communication not getting through

00:16:59.540 it's just remarkable in a very disturbing way the level of incompetency of the police that's been

00:17:08.280 revealed and i think well i'm pretty confident you're going to see even more to come and this is

00:17:15.000 many things but a national emergency it is not uh it's a national embarrassment and that's not a

00:17:21.780 reason to invoke the emergencies act keith wilson i know you are uh plugging away daily in ottawa and

00:17:27.620 we'll be sure to have you back as long as uh as long as you can spare some time outside of the

00:17:31.680 hearing room and also your colleague eva chipiuk is welcome back anytime thanks so much sir always good

00:17:36.340 to talk to you thank you thanks for listening to the andrew lawton show support the program by donating

00:17:41.880 to true north at www.tnc.news

Juno News - October 29, 2022

Still no proof Emergencies Act was necessary (ft. Keith Wilson)

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript