>>> Part 4 of 5...
that speak to this problem; a fundamental problem of professional morality.
I eagerly await the review's final report, and I am expectant of its
recommendations and remedies. These recommendations should be directed at
the profession at all levels, including the Law Society of Upper Canada and
the bar association. I note that the newly-elected treasurer of the Law
Society of Upper Canada, Susan Elliot, on June 23, 1995, stated her
approach for, in her words, "dealing with the legal profession's numerous
problems".
Honourable senators, the journey of these false sworn statements through
the courts holds continuing interest. I am told that judges are intolerant
of perjury in criminal justice proceedings, but not necessarily so in civil
justice, particularly family law proceedings. Perjury occurs on the stand
at trial, and also in the swearing of false affidavits. The Civil Justice
Review report indicates that most family law proceedings never reach trial;
never reach adjudication by a trial judge under Themis's sword. Since the
deponents of false affidavits never take the stand, the ground for
manipulation and civil molestation is fertile.
Honourable senators, legal practitioners rely on absolute judicial
privilege to shiedl these affidavit materials. They are misguided and
mistaken. Absolute judicial privilege does not shield against perjury and
related offences as, similarly, absolute parliamentary privilege does not
shield members of Parliament against perjury in parliamentary proceedings.
THE HON. THE SPEAKER: Honourable senator, I am sorry, your time limit has
been reached.
SENATOR COOLS: I have only a few more pages, honourable senators. May I
finish?
THE HON. THE SPEAKER: Is it agreed that the honourable senator be allowed
to finish?
SOME HON. SENATORS: Agreed.
SENATOR COOLS: The singular statutory exception to all privilege is
perjury. All privilege, including solicitor-client, is lost through perjury
or counselling perjury. Her Majesty has spoken throuhg the Criminal Code as
to how her privileges are subject to truth. The Criminal Code of Canada
ousts absolute privilege in the commission of perjury. From the highest to
the lowest in the land, all are subject to the law. Privilege protects
truth and abhors perjury and lawlessness.
Honourable senators, the issue is truth. The issue is the obligation owed
by barristers, as officers to the court, to truth and to justice itself.
Certainly barristers know that perjury and prevarication are questions of
crime. The Oxford dictionary defines truth as the:
        Disposition to speak or act truly or without deceit;... true
        statement or account; that which is accordance with the fact....
Honourable senators, without truth the judicial process cannot function.
The swearing of false statements, knowing them to be false with an intent
to mislead justice, to obtain a result and advantage in a court judgement
is a crime. The issue of crime is a federal matter and a matter for
examination by this Parliament.
Our Constitution places Parliament as a controlling power over the courts
of law. It invests Parliament with a guardianship of the bench, and the
administration of justice. Our Constitution has conferred upon us the
superintendence over the proceedings of the courts. Further, the Criminal
Code of Canada, the Divorce Act and the Canada Evidence Act are statutes of
this Parliament.
Honourable senators, the case of Reverend B. jolts every sensibility. It
offends every principle. This case of countless dishonesties, perjury,
disceptions, illegalities, legal irregularities, professional carelessness
and bureaucratic negligence is a diabolical creation by a wife. The
Children's Aid Society and its resources, using the Child Welfare Act,
supported this wife in the pursuit of a father. It actively supported a
mother who exposed her children to untold abuse and suffering.
Honourable senators, these facts are driven home by both judges. Both
judgements inform us that the Children's Aid Society, having realised, in
the society's words, that "they had backed the wrong horse", and having
declared these girls are not in need of protection, still persisted in
their accusations and in litigation, for purposes unrelated to the
protecion of the best interests of the children, but related to their own
institutional corporate self-interests. Mr. Justice Somers described the
Society's position in this regard as "utterly unconscionable".
The perceptiveness, mental prowess and integrity of these two judges, who
finally provided some measure of justice for these two little girls and
their father, was impressive. Honourable senators, there are some slendid
judges in this country. This current situation is an enormous strain for
them, as it is for the independence of judges and for the convention of the
independence of the judiciary.
I urge that honourable senators examine this disorder, this malignancy,
this pathology that has grown in our midst in the legal system. I urge
honourable senators to look closely at the case of Reverend B., which is
typical of many, Mr Justice Blair's Review Report, family law proceedings,
trends in family law, malice and perjury as delivered in the system, and
 >>> Continued to next message...
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR]
--- Maximus 3.00
---------------