Contact us now: Phone: +111111111



CHP Canada Challenges Parliament to End the Abuse of Power by the Courts

Wed, June 22, 2016

Good morning. I’m Rod Taylor, National Leader of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada. On behalf of CHP Canada, I want to alert Canadians to the dire threat we face when we allow our courts—and especially the Supreme Court of Canada—to undermine our parliamentary democracy and impose upon Canadians laws and customs contrary to those envisioned by our founders.

We live in one of the freest countries in the world, a country established—as the Preamble to our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms says—“on the supremacy of God and the rule of law”. The supremacy of God assures us that the natural laws of morality, decency, common sense and justice, laws which reflect the heart of our Creator and are the foundation of our heritage, will prevail over inadequate human notions, subject to the frailties of misguided zeal and personal interest. The rule of law posits that we are all equal under the law and subject to the same freedoms, protections and responsibilities.

When our Constitution including the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was patriated in 1982, there were concerns expressed by some that relying upon Charter Law would lead to judicial activism, judicial abuse and ultimately a judicial oligarchy. From recent events, it would appear that those fears were not without basis. To relieve those concerns, the Nothwithstanding Clause was added, a provision that would allow Parliament to set aside a Supreme Court decision for up to five years. This was proposed as a safeguard against judge-made laws.

However, in 34 years, this provision has never yet been implemented by a federal government, in spite of the fact that arbitrary decisions by the Supreme Court have warranted such dramatic actions more than once.

Our parliamentary democracy was structured in such a way that the people, the citizens of Canada, could establish for themselves just laws, fitting for a civilized people. It was never the intention of the founders that Canada would be ruled by nine unelected judges who could write laws or remove laws according to their personal whims and biases. This, however, is the situation to which Canada has deteriorated.

A number of court decisions have seriously damaged the integrity of our democracy and have shaped Canadian laws and culture in ways that have been harmful for children and families. Because they were made over a period of years, Canadian society has become complacent about the changes. Parliament itself, the rightful lawmaking body, has become submissive to the rule of the courts and—for the most part—has accepted or resigned itself to court decision without resistance. In some cases, this has been against its better judgment but in some cases, Parliament has used the courts as an excuse for taking the easy way out and allowing changes to the law which it would otherwise have found unpopular to implement through legislative debate.

Senator Anne Cools once said that the problem was not only judicial activism but cowardice in the House of Commons. Her chilling observation still holds true today.

Here are a few examples of judicial activism run amuck:

  1. In 1988, the Supreme Court threw out Canada’s abortion law, claiming it violated a woman’s “security of person”. Of course, they ignored the incongruity of prematurely ending a human life in the womb in order to ensure a woman’s “choice” unencumbered by legal concerns. Since then, Canada has routinely been killing approximately 100,000 babies each year. Post-abortive women have suffered increased rates of breast cancer, depression, suicide, infertility and other negative health impacts but the courts and Parliament have—so far—continued under the illusion that this has improved the “security of person”.
  2. In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled in the Egan case that although the framers of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms had deliberately left ”sexual orientation” out of Section 15, that it “should have been included”. In other words, they added other words and gave them the same weight as the categories of protection which Parliament had actually included such as age, gender and race. This deliberate manipulation of the Charter by those sworn to uphold the Charter led, in due time and many court cases later, to the final acceptance of same-sex marriage in a forced vote in Parliament in 2005. This has in turn led to the imposition of sexual orientation and gender identity as classroom topics in the provinces. Successive failures of legislatures across the country to maintain traditional moral values has resulted in a growing epidemic of behavioural addictions and disease. Had Parliament confronted and resisted the Supreme Court’s presumptuous twisting of Section 15 in 1995, the damage could have been contained but 21 years later, the gay agenda has become thoroughly entrenched through political correctness and punitive and specious human rights cases.
  3. In December 2013, the Supreme Court struck down Canada’s laws against prostitution and told the government it had one year to write a new law. That’s right; the Supreme Court sided with the owner-operator of a brothel against public sentiment and traditional moral values.
  4. In February 2015, the Supreme Court threw out the law against physician-assisted suicide and again, gave Parliament one year to write a new law allowing the same. Debate about this topic has embroiled the house and Senate for the past several months. In the end, Parliamentarians concluded they had “no choice” but to accommodate the Supreme Court ruling. On its face, that irresponsible surrender to the Court on a matter of life and death is unconscionable. And speaking of conscience, Parliament even refused to allow doctors to exercise their conscience rights, but concluded that all must participate in the killing of the elderly, at least by referring their patients.
  5. Most recently, the Supreme Court made the absurd distinction that a man who caused the sexual defilement of his teenaged stepdaughter by the family dog was not guilty of bestiality because no penetration had occurred. This goes beyond the realm of poor judgment. This clearly smacks of judicial activism, social engineering and a basic disregard for Canada’s historic moral base as well as the clear intent of the Preamble to the Charter itself which placed the supremacy of God and the rule of law as the foundational underpinnings of Canadian law and culture.

It’s time for Parliament to awaken once again to its mandate and take its place as the branch of government entrusted with the writing of laws. Until MPs and Senators find the courage to resist Supreme Court activism, our nation will wander farther and farther from the biblical values and principles upon which it was founded.

It’s time for the citizens of this country to demand that their elected representatives do their job and defend the principles which have made this country great. Our parliamentarians must regain their role as lawmakers or accept a judicial oligarchy which can only lead to cruel dictatorship.

CHP Canada calls on the Canadian government to wrest the right to govern from the hands of the usurping courts and return it to the rightful hands of the people. The Notwithstanding Clause is one tool available to help protect our democracy; the government must use the tools it has before it is too late.

God keep our land glorious and free! Thank you.

Rod Taylor
National Leader
Christian Heritage Party of Canada

For more information or comment, contact:
CHP Executive Director Vicki Gunn

Share to Gab