The Law and Disorder in Fairy Creek

Posted on by Pete Cross

If one ever wanted to find an example of the collision of the progressive narrative with the more real world of economics and industry, especially in British Columbia, one could do no better than looking to the logging industry of this Province. There is no need to talk about the obvious and well documented economic impact logging has had for this part of the world; it has been the primary and overwhelming industrial force in terms of economic growth and prosperity. It is also highly predictable therefore that the environmental warriors, including the fringe factions of the movement in the west, would naturally gravitate to and stake their ground on Vancouver Island. The war on “The Man” fits comfortably in the granola hemp-weaving establishment of the Island, surrounded as they are by old growth timber. It makes for an interesting philosophical coming together as there is a large divide between the folks on the Island who work and live in saw dust covered Wild Ass logger pants, and those sporting tie-dye shirts and harem pants.

This story starts in 2020, when the NDP government granted timber licences to an area north east of Port Renfrew, in the Fairy Creek watershed on Vancouver Island. Since that time the eco-warriors have declared and waged war against the Teal Cedar Products Limited, a member of the Teal-Jones group. Teal Cedar employs about 450 workers, and their logging permit allows them to harvest “old growth timber”. The contract for this project was estimated by Teal to be about $20 million in value. Keep that figure in mind when we go through the costs in this log cutting eco-war.

The protests started right away, and the company complained continually about their employees being harassed and their equipment damaged. One should be mindful of the fact that most of these protests and the protestors themselves are not necessarily “peaceful”– this is not a 1960’s sit in. In fact it became and has been labelled “one of the largest acts of civil disobedience in Canadian history”.

Of course, this all led to an injunction being granted to remove the protestors in April 2021, that was needed to be enforced by the RCMP, but in particular the E division’s C-IRG (Community – Industry Reserve Group). Protests against economic development, such as pipelines and logging have become so predominant in British Columbia, that the RCMP felt the need to create a new separate section in 2017– just to deal with all the protests. This Mountie group was going to bring with it “strategic oversight…” and it would be based on the “Gold,Silver, Bronze command structures”. Anyone who reads this blog over time has come to realize, that as soon as one hear the words, strategic, and oversight, and it then gets lumped in with Gold, Silver, Bronze– one should automatically think bureaucracy and too many supervisors. The Mounties have an Egyptian love of pyramids in terms of structural organizations, and why have a single layer of supervision, when you can add a couple of more layers of oversight and decision making?

So how has it been going? To date at least 1188 individuals have been arrested, 900 for breach of a court ordered injunction, 200 with obstruction, and 12 assaults on police officers.

The activists are being fronted by an organization called the Rainforest Flying Squad. They are led by people like Kathleen Code who sums up the police action in their enforcement of the injunction as being there only to “knock the heads of peaceful protestors”.

This is never an easy situation for the police, you are being summoned to enforce the law, and you are up against a group who have no room for negotiation, in their view only a stoppage in the the logging can be tolerated. These activists for the most part, have no personal or vested responsibility in these situations, other than a hardened belief in their cause.

The Fairy Creek situation, seemingly like all things in British Columbia, is further complicated because of the Indigenous involvement and their various factions. One of the Indigenous First Nations, the Pacheedaht own three sawmills, and have a revenue-sharing agreement with the Province for a sharing of the proceeds from this particular timber contract. But there is a problem here as well, because the Indigenous groups are also divided, some welcoming the protestors, others scorning them and in their political power shared system, the elders of the Indigenous, are not in concert with the pro-logging groups of their Council.

In terms of protestor strategy, one would have thought that if one wished to protest, should be centred on the Provincial government policy and the granting of the licence in Victoria. In British Columbia of course, it is the NDP government that is in power, normally best political friends with any fringe eco viewpoint, but the fact that the protestors go after a private entity rather than camp out in Victoria is in itself interesting. The protest effort worked to a certain degree when the Province did agree during all this upheaval, to a two year deferral for the “old growth” logging component.

So after all the arrests the protest groups, wanted to challenge in any way possible the court injunction, and turned to the usual lawyers based out of Victoria who specialize in protest law. Those lawyers decided that the legal argument that they could possibly raise was that the legal “script” read to the protestors prior to them being forced to move out of the way and facing arrest if they did not do so– was flawed. They had discovered that in several cases, the RCMP read a “shortened script”. Grasping at this apparent legal straw, they wanted to argue that the protestors were therefore not given enough “actual knowledge” of what the injunction contained.

So began the King versus Emily Henderson “also known as Ryan Henderson” case.

The single bare issue is that in order for the police to establish criminal contempt, one had to establish “actual knowledge” or “wilful blindness” to the terms of the injunction. Justice Douglas Thompson of the BC Supreme Court in Nanaimo was a willing audience, and eventually held that even though the injunction itself was not ambiguous, he did agree with the protestor defence team that “the script did not provide sufficient information to fix the respondent with actual knowledge of its material terms, and there was insufficient evidence that the respondent was wilfully blind to those terms”. The Crown was with little doubt somewhat perplexed as would anybody in reading this decision, so they appealed it to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada were not willing to get involved– and turned down the Crown appeal with no reasons given.

Admittedly it is not unusual in these days, that common sense seems a little in short supply when it comes to the law, and it quite often appears that reality seems to sometimes take a back seat to the exactitude of the written legal argument. But here we are given to believe in this legal argument that Henderson, standing facing a group of RCMP officers, who are reading them a script in the middle of the woods, which in essence was commanding them to leave– we are being asked to believe that the script was insufficient for them to understand the meaning and the intent of the injunction, and therefore the intent of the police in being there. Nobody that has ever stood in that position would believe that they did not understand why the police were there. Nobody. It is also well known that if you want to find some self-educated lawyers, find any protest group, as they are the first ones to tell you “they know the law”.

What did this legal “victory” mean or accomplish. Nothing, absolutely nothing. It just put everyone back to square one. Crown Counsel had to find the other 146 cases where the persons involved were read the same “shortened” script and drop those cases. They stated that “Those cases have been dropped because their ability to succeed was placed in doubt”. There are still 210 cases before the courts.

On Tuesday of this week, the RCMP was back at the blockades, as were the protestors. Three people were once again arrested, and one was arrested for assaulting a police officer. The RCMP says that there have been “numerous violations of persons obstructing, impeding and having interfered with forestry operations”. There also have been further reports of harassment and vandalism to the forestry workers and their equipment.

To date the RCMP has spent $18,716,969 in Fairy Creek, most of that in wages. The courts have been jammed with cases, but there is no estimate of that legal bill to date.

The C-IRG continues to bend over backwards to accommodate the “Indigenous cultural matters” and have had to go to class to learn of such things as the “handling of sacred items during protest arrests” and to make sure that they are operating “consistent with the standards and expectations set by bill C-15 and the adoption of the principles of UNDRIP (the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) .” That no doubt was probably a Gold Command decision.

However despite all this genuflection to the woke, the C-IRG, to add insult to injury, is now being investigated by the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission after receiving complaints from these same protestors in March 2023. They are going to look into the “activities and operations of the C-IRG and their systemic compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” Furthermore, this same allegedly independent body the CRCC , is another example of inert bureaucracy, so they have now hired an “Indigenous based law firm” to assist them. They have hired the renowned Turtle Island Law firm. A two person law firm which was formed in 2022, who say they are going to gather testimony “in a de-colonial, Indigenized, and trauma informed manner”. Enough said. Apparently no one can see the clear conflict of interest, just as no one should now expect an unbiased reporting.

So as of today, the protests will continue, the injunction will still need to be enforced, and this time the RCMP will no doubt read the full script– and then this whole circle dance of ridiculousness will continue.

Photo Courtesy of deejayqueue via Flickr Commons – Some rights reserved

Is the World spinning Faster?

Posted on by Pete Cross

Policing issues and the stories that surround it seem to be growing exponentially, always accompanied by surrounding commentary and self-proclaimed expertise flowing from every social platform. Instagram, Reddit, Facebook and Twitter abound with the examination of the police and a professed expertise. The armchair investigators of Netflix are in full voice. In trying to understand why, I have learned that In the last few years the earths rotation has in fact been speeding up (on a normal day the earth travels at the speed of 1000 miles per hour as measured at the equator). So as I find my eyes ricocheting from headline to commission to judicial decision, blaming the earth’s rotation as being responsible is as likely an answer as any other.

In the past week to ten days we have had the start up of the Public Order Emergency Commission in Ottawa; we have learned that 469 foreign criminals are “missing” according to the CBSA; two officers were killed in answering a domestic dispute in Ontario, ambushed by a male with an AK-47; and an Ontario court Judge has ruled that if you are an Indigenous offender you are not allowed to be cross-examined as to any previous offences. So now not only do you have the Gladue decision, you know have it dictated that the Indigenous are not to be subjected to the same trial process.

Closer to home, in the Surrey civic election the old dodger with the sore foot, McCallum, has been replaced by an equally woefully inadequate Brenda Locke. In the first 48 hours, she has already painted herself into a corner, by saying she is giving the Mounties back their job in Surrey, regardless of reality and cost.

So having to choose one story over another is difficult this week. That being said, as much as I would rather ignore it, I guess we will have to go with the Public Order Emergency Commission as the lead story, which is being headed by the Honourable Judge Paul Rouleau. This Commission (we have sure had our share of them lately) has been tasked with understanding “the Government’s decision to declare a public emergency, the circumstances that led to that declaration, and the effectiveness of the measures selected by the Government to deal with the then-existing situation”. As in all Commissions of Inquiry, one needs to be reminded that none of this is to determine criminal fault or civil liability. This is all to determine the “effectiveness” of the implementation of this draconian piece of legislation.

And like all good government Commissions, this too is filled with lawyers of every stripe and denomination: there are two co-lead counsel, five senior counsel, three regional counsel, twelve just “counsel”, three senior policy advisors, seven research counsel, and two “staff”. So including the Judge, there are thirty-two counsel and that is just on the government side of the ledger. The audience at these hearings will be for the most part other lawyers and the media. With this many lawyers there is diminishing hope that the truth behind the declaration of the emergencies act will not be watered down through all these filtering lawyers.

Judge Rouleau is a native of the Ottawa area, went to the University of Ottawa and then went on to be associated with several central Canadian legal firms such as Heenan Blaikie and Cassels Brock and Blackwell. He has been a Judge since 2002 and a strong advocate for French language rights, and would have probably been a better candidate for the Supreme Court than the new Justice O’Bansawin–but let’s put that aside for now.

The good Judge will be overseeing the evidence of sixty five potential witnesses, however do not despair and give up on your regular life schedule, as it is likely that you only need to begin to pay serious attention to the last twenty or so witnesses– which include the politicians such as Trudeau and Freeland. After all, the police have already established that they did not ask for the Emergencies Act, it has also been established that there was no real intelligence indicating that there was a foreign inspired threat in the makeup of the convoy group, nor conspiracies to commit violence, which should leave the Commission with some rather obvious starting points. There is going to be a lot of dancing to be sure. Commissioner Lucki has already done the two step in public committee hearings, where she was forced to admit to not having asked for the implementation of the Emergencies Act. As a devotee to Blair and company, she needed to backtrack, and she did this by saying what a great thing it was, once they had been given these extra powers. Justin Trudeau who spoke publicly about “foreign money” was clearly lying as the intelligence community today said there was no such evidence.

One should also remember that the government is not holding this hearing because they wish to be frank and forthright to the Canadian public, it is because the law states that they have to have an inquiry within 60 days after the enactment of the Emergencies Act. This particular group of Liberals are not fans of focused scrutiny, whether it is in the House of Commons question period or in front of a Commission. They have released some Cabinet documents but have raised “confidence” issues on them; so the general public may never be shown them.

In checking out a Commission it is always helpful to find out who has been given “standing” and “funding” in terms of appearing before the Commission, which simply put, is based on who has a direct and vital interest in the proceedings. So in this case, groups such as the Criminal Lawyers Association, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses line up for standing, and of course for the government to pay for it. These three groups were in fact granted both permission and funding.

However, there was some rather unusual decisions in this regard. Take the case of Mr. Eros who applied for “standing”. Mr. Eros is a CPA and dealt with financing and accounting matters related to the Convoy Group. He was also intricately involved in the administration of the crowd-funding campaign with this same Convoy group. He was however denied standing, as the Judge ruled that he was merely a “witness”. This may be fair.

However, incredibly, the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs was granted “standing” and “funding” to participate in this matter. They argued that they had a substantial and “direct interest in the commission” based on its “role as an umbrella organization representing Indigenous governments” and that it plays a “critical role in governance in Canada in terms of its ensuring that other governments are held accountable for their actions”. Some of you may be surprised at their being Indigenous “governments” in Canada. However, to think that they are there to hold the other “governments” accountable is audacious to say the least, even under the current Federal Liberal love-in regime. So we now have a group who has supported its share of protests, such as the damaging of pipelines and the burning of rail lines which is now going to sit in judgement of the governments reaction to the Ottawa convoy.

The witness testimony has started and began with the bubble wrapped represented citizens of Ottawa talking about the nights of continuous air horns, the disruption of their businesses and the “occupation” of Ottawa. Terms are being bandied about such as a “siege” and a “horrific experience”. The lead plaintiff in the civil suit Zexi Li, is a data analyst, and the second witness. She was working for the government from home and her testimony was how it completely disrupted her life, a story which under cross-examination was by no means dramatic. Most of the city of Ottawa were at this time working from home.

In the last few days the Commission has now started to examine some of the government and police response, before, during and after this clearly “unprecedented” upheaval. What would you expect to find when you have three levels of government; the city, the Province of Ontario, and the Federal Government all weighing in on strategy and tactics with three different police forces, the Ontario Provincial Police, the Ottawa City Police, and the RCMP? Now consider the Ottawa mayor who liked to have confidential discussions with Trudeau, Blair, and Mendocino, but not share those discussions with the Ottawa Police Services Board who supposedly were the designated oversight to the operations. There were Provincial and Federal concerns with the OPSB itself. Then throw in the new Ottawa Police Chief who with the other police managers from the other jurisdictions could not even agree on a “command structure” for several days. Throw in a request for 1800 Ontario Provincial officers, while at the same time consider the initial lacklustre involvement of the RCMP, and then consider an inability to even develop a policing “operational plan” for over 10 days.

Needless to say it was all bureaucracy, miscalculation and the very definition of too many cooks in the kitchen. Bill Blair was suggesting to the Ottawa Chief that he consider more bylaw enforcement, even though by that time 2000 bylaw tickets had been issued. I am sure he thanked Mr. Blair profusely. Justin Trudeau was busting on Doug Ford not doing enough, while at the same time, the OPP seemed to be the best at getting extra officers to the scene. Chief Slolys then resigned. With little doubt he was about to become the scape goat in this massive cockup.

The enacting of the act seems quite clearly to have been a reaction to a discombobulated police management action brought created by a lack of foresight and intelligence gathering, combined with meddling by the usual political group which surfaces in any calamity. It was done for the singular purpose of gaining a political upper hand in the media, to show that they were doing something, and it was concocted by the Federal government and the Liberal ruling party.

The core or the fuel for this action seems to been an inherent inability on the part of the liberal left to relate to the protestors driving these big trucks. They were seen as the working class, the blue collars. This was more than a paper exercise to the protestors. They had lost jobs and the ability to feed their families, and now they were being ignored and pushed to the sidelines. They were at times crude and in your face, willing to physically push back, but their cause was the centre of their existence. This was not a philosophical theory dealing with “systemic” complaints, theirs was a cause that affected their mortgage and their ability to make a living. They were not bubble-wrapped, did not speak in plural pronouns, and did not understand or adhere to the niceties of government levels and protocols. They were not from Ottawa, they did not look like they belonged there, they were not Liberal constituents, and most troubling of all– they drove very big immovable trucks.

So when they got to Ottawa, no one would talk to them, no one even liked them, and they needed to go, at any cost. It was hurting the images of the politicians in power. And the media were willing to report it without question or due diligence.

The protestors prevailed as long as they did because they were met with an unprepared and ill-equipped police force, governed by layers and layers of Ottawa political mandarins concerned only with optics. The politicians found themselves facing, according to the Ottawa mayor’s chief of staff, a “crescendo of collapsing confidence”.

They were also scared. They did not understand and could not relate to the visceral outpourings of the protestors. Their problems were not their problems. So this “local emergency” demanded in their view, the full force of government, the suspension of their inherent rights, and the seizure of their personal financial assets– and now they will be lying to justify it.

Photo courtesy of Ross Dunn via Flickr Creative Commons – Some Rights Reserved