PUBLICATION: The Calgary Sun
DATE:
2004.01.23
EDITION:
Final
SECTION:
Editorial/Opinion
PAGE:
15
BYLINE:
LINK BYFIELD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HANCOCK
ON HOOK
GUN
REGISTRY PROSECUTION RESTS WITH ALBERTA JUSTICE MINISTER
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There
are three things people despise: Someone shirking responsibility, someone
breaking a promise, and a clever lawyer dodging the truth. Which brings us to
Dave Hancock, Alberta's minister of justice.
Under
the law, Hancock's department has a yes-or-no say over the prosecution of all
Criminal Code offences in Alberta. Even though it's a federal act, Section 92 of
the Canadian Constitution and Section 2 of the Criminal Code state that
prosecution is entirely a provincial power.
And
the responsibility doesn't fall on Hancock's department. It falls on him.
Personally.
He
answers to Albertans for the policies and performance of his whole department.
This is called "responsible government," and blood was spilled in
Canada to get it.
Hancock
is a Red Tory who (like all Tories) swears he hates Ottawa's gun registry, but
who decided last June to help Ottawa enforce it. I don't know why. Maybe he's
currying favour with the federal Liberals for reasons of his own, or maybe he
secretly agrees with the gun registry.
All
we know for sure is clever Dave is enforcing it, while denying he's responsible
for doing so. And in playing his little game, he's jeopardizing an exclusive
provincial right as old as Confederation.
You
don't have to believe me, take it from his old U of A law professor, Anne
McLellan. When she was federal justice minister in 2001, she wrote these words
to the justice minister of Manitoba: "The federal government has no
jurisdiction to prosecute Criminal Code offences that relate to firearms
licensing, and could only acquire such jurisdiction by an amendment to the
definition of 'Attorney General' in section 2 of the Criminal Code."
So
now clever Dave is in political hot water. Since 1996, Alberta's Conservative
politicians and Justice officials have been saying -- in fact bragging -- they
will not enforce the Criminal Code section that compels Canadians to license and
register their rifles.
They've
said time and again they'll make the feds (Justice Canada) prosecute under the
Firearms Act.
They'll
show Ottawa how tough we are in Alberta, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Well,
when the gun registry took effect on Jan. 1, 2003, a retired, straight-talking
Metis war vet named Oscar Lacombe took them at their word.
With
advance notice to the Edmonton police, he quietly took a disarmed, unregistered
rifle to a media conference outside the legislature and challenged Ottawa to
charge him under the Firearms Act.
He
knew if he could get the Firearms Act into court, there are 10 solid Charter of
Rights grounds on which it could be struck down by the courts.
His
lawyer warned him that this wouldn't work if Alberta charged him under the
Criminal Code instead of Ottawa charging him under the Firearms Act.
"Alberta won't do that," answered Oscar. "Alberta has said all
along it will leave registry enforcement to Ottawa."
But
lo and behold, after six months of dithering and six years of blow-hard
promises, Alberta Justice -- meaning David Hancock -- went ahead and charged
Oscar under the Criminal Code anyway.
To
shift the blame on to Ottawa, Hancock appointed a federal prosecutor as
provincial agent. When the trial opened in November, this agent had to explain
to the judge she was actually working for the provincial government.
In
the past two weeks, more than 1,000 people have protested Hancock's actions by
e-mailing him, Klein and the entire cabinet, to demand that they drop their case
against Oscar Lacombe.
That's
over 25,000 e-mail messages telling them to let Oscar go. (You can do it too, by
visiting citizenscentre.com and clicking on the Oscar Lacombe campaign.)
Hancock
still insists his department "played no part in the decision to lay the
Criminal Code charges."
He's
still blaming Ottawa, while continuing to prosecute the case through his Ottawa
agent.
It's
like me saying I'm not selling my house, my real estate agent is.
Only a certain kind of lawyer would say it, and only someone very gullible would believe it