WINNIPEG – The Canadian Bill of Rights is the orphan of the Canadian constitution and has been unfairly abandoned by Parliament, said a lawyer representing Dave Bryan.
Art Stacey asked a Court of Queen’s Bench judge here not to overlook the 1960s legislation which outlines the protection of life, liberties, personal security and the enjoyment of property “without due process of law.”
“It has not had the constitutional treatment in court. However, it is still a part of law in Canada and debate around it forms part of the constitution,” said Stacey.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
Stacey said the wheat board act deprives farmers of the enjoyment of their property and doesn’t give them a chance to negotiate or opt out of the transaction.
“Here, there is no process, let alone due process,” he said.
But when the crown’s case unfolds this week, it is expected debate surrounding the bill will continue.
In a brief submitted to judge James Smith at the outset of the trial, crown prosecutor Clyde Bond said the “enjoyment of property” under the Canadian Bill of Rights does not mean an exemption from federal laws regulating the economy.
“The Bill of Rights does not provide constitutional protection to an unrestricted marketplace. It does not entrench a laissez-faire economic philosophy and it does not allow the accused to be exempt from validly enacted laws of Parliament,” the report said.
