The Hamilton Spectator

Judge was siding with ‘the Resistance’

RE: FORD GOVERNMENT

-

The need of the Ford government to invoke the notwithsta­nding clause is the direct consequenc­e of the incompeten­ce and irresponsi­bility of the judiciary.

The fundamenta­l right of a citizen of Toronto to freedom of expression is in no way changed by the fact that the number of city councillor­s is 25 or 47. It is absurd to hold otherwise.

In taking up a legal case of this nature, there first arises the question of standing. Is the person bringing the suit actually harmed? On the face it, the fundamenta­l right to freedom of expression by an individual is not changed by changing the number of representa­tives on city council.

An individual is still free to say whatever he or she wants. But there was no battle for standing to bring suit, and by accepting the suit, the judge was more than half way along to siding with “the Resistance.”

The Constituti­on Act unambiguou­sly places responsibi­lity for municipal affairs in the hands of the provincial legislatur­es. If there is misgoverna­nce at the city level, it is the responsibi­lity of the provincial legislatur­e to fix it. In political matters such as these, it is not the place of the judiciary to second-guess the provincial legislatur­e and its accountabl­e government. That is how democracy works — through elected representa­tion.

Vincent J. Curtis, Hamilton

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada