The first rule of injunctions is that... you do not talk about injunctions. (Sorry. I couldn't resist. Tough day...).
No, the first rule of injunctions is that "the court will generally not grant an injunction for the purpose of enforcing moral obligations or as substitute for the criminal law or quasi-criminal law. There usually must be some property right or some other right infringed."
"When a statute provides a penalty for its breach but is silent as to whether a court may grant an injunction to restrain its contravention, a court must consider the statute as a whole, including its objects, to determine whether the court has such jurisdiction."
I'm fairly confident the government of Alberta cannot go ask a court for an injunction to stop people from breaking the very laws it is responsible for enforcing.
The idea that the government cannot direct the RCMP to enforce the law absent an injunction is ludicrous. We are not in a police junta. Police have individual discretion to enforce, sure. They don't have independent authority to ignore government directives absent court order.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
