Thread by @sunnshiiny

Charlie Angus is critical of judiciary decision re: victim of abuse. Calling on Federal Government to intervene.

burnabynow.com/failed-residen…

Undermining the decisions of a separate branch of government is tantamount to insurrection, and by an experienced MP, borders on sedition.

Adding to this serious infraction, Angus doubles down and demands the Indigenous Relations Minister, Caroline Bennet, to override the decision and provide compensation for the victim’s family.

A call to breach the separation of powers between executive and judicial branches.

Some may think this is just political rhetoric.

It’s not.

It’s the second opposition political party in Canada demanding the executive branch of government throw out the rule of law and override the third branch of government’s decision making authority. The other is CPC.

I’ve called attention to the similarities between NDP and CPC before. Many ignored it.

This is NOT to be ignored.

We have two opposition parties that are actively promoting undermining of an independent branch of government because they aren’t content with a judicial ruling.

This NEEDS to be called out and receive push back. Undermining government institutions is not a viable solution upon receiving a judgement that one does not like or agree with.

That’s currently a severe problem in the US.

Unsatisfied with judicial judgements, the Republican GOP engineered a veritable coup d’état of the US govt using obstructionist methods during Obama’s administration. That is called anarchy.

A questionable 2016 election has led to Trump’s admin & US Senate installing judges that are loyal to Republican/GOP & far right Dominionist Christian ideology. Many of the judiacial appointees are unqualified, but they support a far right belief system.

The numbers of senate judicial appointments in the US, of loyalists to far right ideology, is so severe, that many US pundits estimate the ramifications will be in place for at least the next two generations; i.e. about 40 years.

That’s what anarchy produces.

Anarchy is what happens when parties ignore the rule of law & begin operating from purely partisan perspectives.

Both NDP & CPC are pushing for anarchy.

This is anarchy:

No one will be satisfied with every decision that the judiciary makes. But we don’t undermine federal institutions because of one decision that appears unfair. Or even several decisions. Anarchy is not the solution to dissent.

The judicial decision was based on a technicality. There are more appropriate ways to address dissent with a judicial decision. Appeals of the decisions or directly petitioning the government in written form. The deciding judge mentioned other options for a legal suit.

A review of the available information about the case reveals that this is the fourth legal attempt the defendant has sought compensation from a government fund set up to assist victims of residential school abuse.

But the victim was not on School property, was not technically enrolled in residential school at the time, and the perpetrator while technically an employee of a government department at the time the incident occurred, was not affiliated with Residential Schools.

Therefore the judiciary is required to refuse compensation from the official Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, by law. And has done so 4 times in a row.

The parameters of the fund were determined at the time the govt agreed or was ordered to compensate victims.

Compensation is for victim’s of abuse that occurred due to the Residential School system by employees of Residential Schools. A narrow technicality that does not include this abuse victim’s circumstances.

It doesn’t negate the abuse or the pain & anguish she suffered.

There are other avenues that could result in compensation, but have not yet been explored. This is the fourth judicial decision, but several more refusals were made by the committee overseeing the dispensation of compensation to victims.

That’s why it is so important to design the parameters of any settlements to include ALL victims.

Something Angus & several NDP MP’s, including their official leader Singh, refuse to support for First Nations Child Welfare compensation during & after the federal election.

Singh, Angus, Ashton and several other NDP members pushed for a hurried decision to compensate the narrow scope of individuals identified by the Human Rights Commission ruling.

PM Trudeau requested the case be dismissed so parameters could be expanded to include ALL victims.

So both the Residential Schools compensation agreement and the FN Child Welfare compensation judgement miss and overlook victims, denying them compensation.

NDP approach is to rush to settle the case and bypass the people they say they are trying to assist.

While it may be cold and impersonal, government institutions are not run by emotional appeals. Decisions need to be made that encompass the issue and include all victims based on facts.

What Angus is doing is pandering to emotional appeal and calling for anarchy in the process.

This is pure populism. Appealing to emotions vs reason.

Of course victims deserve compensation. But don’t ignore the rule of law to facilitate compensation.

Don’t remove the independence of the judicial branch of govt of Canada because of outrage at one of its decisions.

Interfering with the judiciary is anarchy. A dangerous road to walk on.

What exactly is NDP pushing to implement?

Anarchy?

Sure resembles something approximating ANARCHY!

Democratic principles of governance don’t produce perfection. There is no utopian perfect system to apply the rule of law and order.

But anarchy is NOT the solution to unpleasant outcomes Mr. Angus. @CharlieAngusNDP

Law and order is the favoured system in Canadian society.

Try to remember that before inciting we overthrow the judiciary because you didn’t like the 4th court to make the same decision.

Why don’t you help this family explore alternate methods to obtain compensation?

Or is anarchy what you actually seek?