Aservire
Leeftijd: 59 Geslacht: Sterrenbeeld:
Berichten: 77
|
Geplaatst: za 31 jan 2009 17:51 Onderwerp: .doc 43 page: Canadian Court on the term PERSON |
|
|
Would like to have upload this, because can't link to it.
Every centence is numbered.
1
1 *August 19, 2008 9:30 a.m. session
2 Commissioner Evans A Sitting Justice of the Peace
3 in the Provincial Court of
4 Alberta
5 D. Melney, Esq. For the Crown
6 (NO COUNSEL) For the Accused
7 W. Thomas and A. Hurtarte Court Clerks
8 ------------------------------------------------------------------
9 *Discussion
10 MR. MELNEY: Sir, we still have one other
11 matter. It's the --actually, the matters of Renzo
12 Koornhof.
13 THE COMMISSIONER: And it is quarter to 4 already.
14 MR. MELNEY: It's quarter to 4 already. I've
15 called the name, and I'll do it again. Renzo Koornhof.
16 I have two people before the Court, sir. I've
17 spoken to one individual, but it perhaps would be --I
18 should leave to the Court to determine who's who.
19 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay.
20 THE ACCUSED: Your Worship,
21 THE COMMISSIONER: Your name?
22 THE ACCUSED: --first, I would like to state
23 that I have respect for your position as well as these
24 proceedings, and that -that I am here with no ill
25 will or malice aforethought as this is a de facto
26 court, and I am here for administrative purposes only,
27 and I do not recognize that the courtroom nor yourself
2
1 do have power over me. I'm here to fulfill my duty to
2 correct a misunderstanding and to help fulfill my duty
3 to ensure the preservation of the unalienable right to
4 travel and move freely in public without threat of
5 molestation or intimidation by fictitious corporate
6 entities. I am making restricted appearance under my
7 unlimited commercial liability. I claim common law
8 jurisdiction and seek justice with equity law remedy if
9 necessary.
10 You may call me Renzo, capital 'R' E-N-Z-O, and
11 I'm of the family Koornhof, capital 'R' lower case
12 O-O-R-N-H-O-F. And this is my assistant. You may call
13 him G-R-E-G, capital 'G' lower case R-E-G.
14 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay. How many witnesses do we
15 have on this trial?
16 MR. MELNEY: I believe I'm going to proceed with
17 one police witness on this.
18 There are first of all, a little bit of
19 housekeeping. There are four charges shown on the
20 docket list. One of those charges, ticket ending
21 6956E, is shown as a violation of driving without a
22 valid licence, 51(a).
23 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
24 MR. MELNEY: The Crown is withdrawing that
25 charge.
26 THE COMMISSIONER: I assume you have no objection to
27 the Crown withdrawing the charge.
3
1 THE ACCUSED: No. Sir, sorry. I missed that.
2 Which charge exactly? What was the –
3 MR. MELNEY: The ticket number is -
4 THE COMMISSIONER: 6956E.
5 MR. MELNEY: That is driving without a
6 subsisting licence. It is actually a duplicate charge
7 of the other one that appears on the docket, so that's
8 the purpose for withdrawing that charge.
9 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. It is withdrawn.
10 MR. MELNEY: On the other three matters, sir,
11 there is one police witness. The Crown would like
12 to -since the matters are all related to one
13 incident, they are basically administrative charges,
14 the Crown would like to proceed on all three charges
15 with the one police witness.
16 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr. Koornhof, how many witnesses do
17 you have?
18 THE ACCUSED: Well, do I have I would like to
19 say that I do not - I do not agree with proceeding
20 with the charges at this point in time simply because
21 there's -the charges, as I understand them, according
22 to the Traffic Safety Act, Section 51 -well, all the
23 sections that there are - are relating to persons, and
24 according to -and I would like to claim that I'm not
25 a legal person as defined by the Interpretation Act of
26 Alberta, which excludes very specifically free -free
27 human beings and does not -and only includes
4
1 corporations or legal representatives of such
2 corporations. And I have not seen nor presented with,
3 even at the time of the incident, nor at any time
4 since, including the various times that I've attempted
5 to communicate with the corporation of Alberta --I've
6 never been presented with nor seen any evidence that I,
7 during that incident, acted as a legal person.
8 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, Mr. Koornhof, you are
9 standing up. You are moving your arms, your legs. You
10 walked forward. You are breathing. You are talking.
11 You are communicating in an intelligent fashion. You
12 are not making animal sounds.
13 THE ACCUSED: Are --Your Worship, -
14 THE COMMISSIONER: So
15 THE ACCUSED: --is that the definition of person
16 according to the Interpretation Act of Alberta? And is
17 that the --is that the definition of the word "person"
18 that is to be used under the Traffic Safety Act of
19 Alberta irregardless --or regardless of what the
20 Interpretation Act says?
21 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, okay. First of all, I do not
22 have a copy of the Interpretation Act here.
23 THE ACCUSED: May I present the Act to you -
24 THE COMMISSIONER: Certainly.
25 THE ACCUSED: --because I do have a copy of it.
26 THE COMMISSIONER: But I believe the definition you
27 are referring to is to include corporations within the
5
1 definition of persons. It is not for the purpose of
2 excluding.
3 THE ACCUSED: But in that case, Your Honour -
4 Your Worship, if it does not only include corporation,
5 heirs, executives, administrators or other legal
6 represent -representatives, then -and I would
7 imagine that those that created the statutes do so in a
8 very specific manner and are not trying to be vague,
9 but that they would
10 THE COMMISSIONER: You would be surprised how vague
11 they can be sometimes.
12 THE ACCUSED: Because I attempted to maintain my
13 honour and read the laws or the statutes as they are
14 and see whether they --how they apply to human beings
15 and whether they apply to human beings or to
16 corporations, and according to this interpretation, the
17 word "person" only includes corporation. It does not
18 include human being or --any human being unless they
19 act with consent as a legal representative of a person.
20 Now, I --in order to maintain my honour, I'm
21 entirely willing to accept these charges, and I'm
22 I'm in --I'm willing to --I'm willing to plead guilty
23 upon verified proof of claim that I am not a free man
24 on the land; that any contracts between myself and the
25 corporation known as the Province of Alberta have not
26 expired; that Alberta's Interpretation Act is not used
27 to interpret enactments of the corporation known as the
6
1 Province of Alberta from the language known as legalese
2 into common English; that Alberta’s Interpretation Act
3 does not clearly exclude free human beings not acting
4 as legal representatives of a fictional corporation
5 from being included in the legal definition of the word
6 "person"; and that at any time during the incident in
7 question there was any evidence that I was acting as a
8 1egal person as defined by the Interpretation Act; and
9 that the corporations known as the Government of Canada
10 and therefore, by delegation of authority, the Province
11 of Alberta do not hold de facto sovereign authority
12 over the land --or do not hold sovereign sorry -do
13 not hold de facto sovereign authority and therefore
14 hold no lawful authority over the geographic region
15 known as Canada; and that the geographic region of
16 Canada is not a common law jurisdiction; and that I was
17 not acting peacefully in fulfillment of my duty to
18 ensure continuance of the common law right to travel;
19 and that peace or police officers do not have a duty to
20 differentiate between law and statutes; and that anyone
21 who cooperates with peace/police officers after they
22 have been threatened with arrest is not considered to
23 be acting out of fear, and therefore, all actions taken
24 by them is to be considered nonconsensual and under
25 duress.
26 THE COMMISSIONER: I take it, Mr. Koornhof, that -
27 THE ACCUSED: I mean
7
1 THE COMMISSIONER: --you are reading that, and that
2 would be an appropriate written argument to submit, but
3 I am not going to deal with all of that verbally and
4 orally at this point in time.
5 THE ACCUSED: Okay. How do I submit that to
6 yourself in written form?
7 THE COMMISSIONER: Well -
8 THE ACCUSED: Be --not being a lawyer, having no
9 experience with these proceedings, I would like some
10 assistance as to the processes in order to gain my
11 remedy according to law.
12 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay. Well, you said that you had
13 read up on the law, that you had done some research on
14 this. Your research should have shown you that if you
15 had a lengthy argument, any lengthy arguments are to be
16 made in writing. And if you are taking objection at
17 the outset to the jurisdiction of this court, then
18 would have thought that what you should do is present
19 your written argument, provide it to the Crown well in
20 advance of the trial so that they have an opportunity
21 to go over it as well, because it is not fair to just
22 spring it on them at the trial, and secondly, then it
23 is put on the clerk's file along with the Crown's
24 response to your written argument, and then I get a
25 chance to read it prior to the trial.
26 THE ACCUSED: Your Worship, since --being that
27 once again, as I said, I do not know the proper
8
1 proceedings --and I have looked, and I have attempted
2 to find them --I did what I believed was right and
3 in submitting as all --as much information as I
4 possibly could and finding negotiation. I have on
5 numerous occasions contacted the Edmonton Police
6 Service, their legal counsel, Minister of
7 Transportation, the Minister of Justice, and the
8 Attorney --well, Minister of Justice and Attorney
9 General as well as the Lieutenant Governor, the Mayor,
10 the --the MLA for the region in where I live, the
11 Premier.
12 THE COMMISSIONER: You have spoken directly to all of
13 these people?
14 THE ACCUSED: I have sent communications via
15 registered mail. I have --I have confirmation that
16 they received them, and they have refused to --they
17 ignored me. And within my communications, it did state
18 that if they ignore me, I will assume that my
19 understanding of the events, of the situation is
20 correct.
21 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, to begin with, that is --you
22 cannot do that because that would be --you know, that
23 is similar to what telemarketers used to do. They
24 would send you something in the mail or over the phone,
25 and if you did not respond within 'X' number of days,
26 you were deemed to have agreed to buy whatever it is
27 they are selling, and you cannot do that.
9
1 THE ACCUSED: Well, -
2 THE COMMISSIONER: That is illegal, and
3 THE ACCUSED: --as -
4 THE COMMISSIONER: --similarly, taking this position
5 that you have just stated you did, you cannot do that
6 either,
7 THE ACCUSED: Well, as --as I said, -
8 THE COMMISSIONER: --same reason.
9 THE ACCUSED: --as a nonexpert in the system, in
10 this process, I would –
11 THE COMMISSIONER: Well,
12 THE ACCUSED: --like to
13 THE COMMISSIONER: --maybe you should have hired a
14 lawyer to deal with it properly.
15 THE ACCUSED: Well, I fail to see how I need to
16 pay somebody in order to gain justice in the land of
17 Canada, I --I mean, not being within the -18
18 THE COMMISSIONER: Then do not -
19 THE ACCUSED: legal jurisdiction of the
20 province.
21 THE COMMISSIONER: Then do not complain that you do
22 not know what you are doing if you are not prepared to
23 hire someone who does know what they are doing.
24 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: May --may I speak for one moment,
Your Honour?
26 THE COMMISSIONER: Sorry. Your name for the record?
27 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Sorry. My name's Greg, of the
10
1 Adams (phonetic) family.
2 THE COMMISSIONER: You –
3 MR. ADAMS: In this case here, they Renzo
4 has presented he's -he's contacted everybody that
5 he's able to contact.
6 THE COMMISSIONER: He has attempted to contact.
7 MR. ADAMS: Attempted to contact. He's had
8 communications, from my understanding, with the -the
9 Police Department, the police chief's office, and he's
10 what his capacity is to understand the law.
11 Like, the law is written in a legalese. I believe that
12 if somebody is able to interpret and understand the
13 laws, then they can be held accountable for that. If
14 somebody is not is able to understand to the law to
15 their own what they're able to understand is what
16 they should be considered -held
17 accountable for. In this case, Renzo has -
18 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, but if that was true, then
19 that argument taken to its conclusion would
20 mean that someone who, for example, is illiterate could
21 say, Well, I can't read the law, so therefore, I'm not
22 bound by any of it; therefore, I can walk out the
23 doors, and even though in the Criminal Code it says
24 it's illegal to murder, bang,
25 MR. ADAMS: Without lawful excuse.
26 THE COMMISSIONER: -that is not -that is not
27 illegal, -
11
1 MR. ADAMS: The
2 THE COMMISSIONER: --I can't read the law.
3 MR. ADAMS: The Criminal Code doesn't say that
4 you can't murder. It says you can't murder without
5 lawful excuse. We're presenting that in this case
6 there is lawful excuse.
7 THE COMMISSIONER: Well,
8 MR. ADAMS: And that the lawful -
9 THE COMMISSIONER: --if -
10 MR. ADAMS: -excuse is presented by his
11 THE COMMISSIONER: If you do not understand -
12 MR. ADAMS: --notice of understanding
13 (INDISCERNIBLE) .
14 THE COMMISSIONER: Now, I will grant you that a lot of
15 the statutes and a lot of the case law is written in
16 what commonly referred to as legalese. It is not a
17 "language," but that is why we have lawyers. That is
18 why we have
19 MR. ADAMS: But if you're -
20 THE COMMISSIONER: traffic representatives to
21 MR. ADAMS: If
22 THE COMMISSIONER: --try and help people to
23 MR. ADAMS: You're
24 THE COMMISSIONER: understand, and that is why
25 there is a significant movement to amend legislation,
26 to rewrite it in plain language and similarly for
27 judges to write --if they are making written
12
1 judgments, to write them in plain language so that it
2 is more understandable to the average person, so that
3 there is less of a requirement to go out and hire a
4 lawyer or some other person who is more familiar with
5 the law.
6 MR. ADAMS: Okay.
7 THE COMMISSIONER: But nonetheless
8 THE ACCUSED: Well, if --if the only way to
9 interpret the law and understand the law is through the
10 hiring of a lawyer, then is --well, then the law is
11 not reachable by everyone. I mean, the law is --there
12 should be equal equality under the law is paramount,
13 is –
14 THE COMMISSIONER: I would agree.
15 MR. ADAMS: Then if equality under the law is
16 paramount and the only way for me to understand the law
17 is to hire a lawyer for pay, then someone who has more
18 resources available to them can get a better
19 understanding of the law than I can, and therefore,
20 that –
21 THE COMMISSIONER: Which is part of the reason why
22 it is one of the reasons why legislation being
23 rewritten in common language, why decisions are being
24 written in common, plain language, plain English as
25 opposed to
26 MR. ADAMS: Then –
27 THE COMMISSIONER: or French, whichever, -
13
1 THE ACCUSED: So if
2 THE COMMISSIONER: -to try and facilitate that.
3 THE ACCUSED: Now, from -from my understanding
4 from the education that I received from the government
5 of Canada, if there is a problem with the
6 legislature -there is a problem with a legislated
7 rule, then it is the duty of the court system to effect
8 that change in order to make that law more
9 understandable to the common man, and the only way that
10 the -that the legislated rules will get changed is
11 through the challenge brought forth by common men who
12 do not understand and who wish to -who wish to live
13 lawfully, who wish to live peacefully, and are in fact
14 told -and who read one thing, are told something
15 else, read something else, are told something else.
16 And that is why I'm here today, because I don't know, I
17 don't understand, and I would like to. I would like
18 help from the court system. I would like help from
19 I mean, my sovereign well, one of the sovereigns of
20 this land, someone that I have pledged allegiance
21 towards is the Queen of -Queen of Canada and, I mean,
22 as I said, you know, as from my understanding, the only
23 human being -or not the only human being, but the
24 only legal person who has lawful authority over this
25 land, because I have -because from -as I said
26 earlier, you know this is a de facto court, which has
27 de facto power flowing from the Governor General's
14
1 office down through the --through the federal
2 parliament, through the provincial parliament,
3 provincial legislature, and then to here, and that
4 and so therefore, they only have de facto power.
5 THE COMMISSIONER: They have delegated power.
6 THE ACCUSED: I'm -
7 THE COMMISSIONER: Power has been delegated from Queen
8 to the provinces and the federal government and from
9 the provinces to municipalities and so on.
10 THE ACCUSED: So, Your Worship, do you deny under
11 your full commercial liability that your --that
12 this
13 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, -
14 THE ACCUSED: --this court is a -
15 THE COMMISSIONER: --commercial liability
16 THE ACCUSED: --de facto court?
17 THE COMMISSIONER: --is not an appropriate term.
18 THE ACCUSED: All right. Do you deny that this
19 is not a court with de facto authority?
20 THE COMMISSIONER: This is a court that is enacted
21 to statute under Alberta legislation. Alberta
22 has the legal authority to create this court, and this
23 court is established, as I said, by statute.
24 THE ACCUSED: So you're not denying that this is
25 a de facto court?
26 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, to with, I do not know
27 what your definition of de facto is and -
15
1 THE ACCUSED: My definition of de facto is
2 combination of Section 15 of the Canada -of Canada's
3 Criminal Code along with Black's Law Dictionary, and
4 can enter these to --I can provide these to you so
5 that you may see my definition of de facto and as well
6 see an e-mail from the Governor General's office
7 affirming that the Governor General has de facto
8 sovereign power on the land of Canada and does not have
9 lawful authority over the land of Canada or the land
10 known as Canada, the geographical region.
11 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay. Well, before we get into
12 that, I am not an expert in constitutional law. This
13 court, at this level of court anyways, does not deal
14 with constitutional law issues. If you wish to raise a
15 constitutional law issue, then you have to go to a
16 higher court.
17 THE ACCUSED: Your Worship, all I would like to
18 know is where the power, where the authority comes
19 from. You yourself said that it comes from the
20 provincial government. Does the provincial government
21 not get their authority from the federal government?
22 THE COMMISSIONER: In some issues, it does. In some
23 cases, it does not.
24 THE ACCUSED: And the provin --and the federal
25 government gets its authority from the Governor
26 General's office, does it not?
27 THE COMMISSIONER: I am not a constitutional law
16
1 expert. I have not
2 THE ACCUSED: Well, either this is a law -a de
3 jure or a de facto court.
4 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay.
5 THE ACCUSED: I mean, I would like to know which
6 before entering in contract with you.
7 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, we are not entering into a
8 contract. You are not offering to sell me anything. I
9 am not offering to sell you anything. I am not
10 offering -
11 THE ACCUSED: Well, you -you -you're –
12 THE COMMISSIONER: to buy anything from you.
13 THE ACCUSED: -offering to pass judgment upon
14 me, are you not?
15 THE COMMISSIONER: A contract is involving a buying
16 and selling of something.
17 THE ACCUSED: Where did you get that definition
18 from?
19 THE COMMISSIONER: A contract is -whether that thing
20 is a pen or whether that thing is services, but a
21 contract is an agreement between people to buy or sell
22 something or do something in exchange for something
23 else.
24 MS. LOGAN: If I may assist the Court, -
25 THE COMMISSIONER: Go ahead.
26 MS. LOGAN: -my name is Logan, first initial
27 'K', student-at-law with the Crown prosecutor's office.
17
1 I believe the precise definition that you're searching
2 for is consideration. Contracts must have some form of
3 consideration, and I see –
4 THE COMMISSIONER: There is none in this courtroom.
5 MS. LOGAN: -no consideration here.
6 THE ACCUSED: Very well. So I mean, in this
7 case, I mean, my -at this point, you refuse to -you
8 refuse to look into whether the interpretation -the
9 definition of person as per the Interpretation Act
10 applies to the Traffic Safety Act. Is that correct?
11 Your Worship, were you -from my understanding so far,
12 you were using your own definition of person, which you
13 have stated as simply being somebody that moves and
14 can -can speak and –
15 THE COMMISSIONER: Well,
16 THE ACCUSED: -has -
17 THE COMMISSIONER: -I said that because you said you
18 were not a person.
19 THE ACCUSED: And I said according to the
20 Interpretation Act of Alberta, according to its
21 definition of the word "person." Now, if it has a
22 flawed definition of the word "person" according to
23 law, then can you help me in changing that? Because r
24 have no other method of doing that apart from coming
25 before you and stating this, because –
26 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, what I am prepared to do is I
27 am prepared to look at the Interpretation Act if you
1 have a copy of it there. No. Hand it to the clerk.
* 5-15 minutes of the Commissioner reading the Interpretation act *
2 "Person" includes a corporation and the
3 heirs, executors, administrators or other
4 legal representatives of a person.
5 THE ACCUSED: I would interpret -
6 THE COMMISSIONER: So it does not mean it is only
7 those things.
8 THE ACCUSED: But -THE
9 COMMISSIONER: Those things are included -THE
10 ACCUSED: You -THE
11 COMMISSIONER: --in what a person is.
12 THE ACCUSED: From my understanding in a
13 THE COMMISSIONER: A person is a human being.
14 MR. ADAMS: Your Honour, I believe there's a
15 legal maxim; I can't remember what it's called, but -that
16 if --in law, all is -
17 THE ACCUSED: If - if something is - is
18 specifically included and stated to be included,
19 everything else is to be excluded. If they did not
20 wish to exclude they --they did say in there the
21 "legal representatives of a person." I interpret that
22 to mean that since they used the word "person" to
23 define --in the definition of the word "person," that
24 the word "person," when used in an enactment, is that
25 specifically and that the very last word in that
26 definition, the person that they use actually
27 references the common English definition of the word
19
1 "person," which is a human being with a capacity for
2 rights and duties and the ability to communicate;
3 therefore, they specifically say that it includes the
4 corporations and legal representatives of a human
5 being.
6 And again, I implore you, if that definition is
7 incorrect and vague, can we, together, in honour, find
8 a way to fix that so that all may live honourably.
9 THE COMMISSIONER: Crown.
10 MR. MELNEY: I'm not sure where to begin.
11 First of all, this is a court of competent
12 jurisdiction, so it would be the Crown's submission the
13 court has jurisdiction over this over this
14 offence; then we can therefore our business.
15 The issue of the definition of a word such a
16 "person," which is used in the legislation to define a
17 particular violation, in this case, a person who drives
18 without a valid driver's license, et cetera, et cetera,
19 is subject to argument, albeit at the end of the day.
20 To present an argument –
21 THE ACCUSED: Objection, Your Honour
22 MR. MELNEY: Excuse me. I'm in the middle of
23 this.
24 THE ACCUSED: --or Your Worship.
25 THE COMMISSIONER: Let him -THE
26 ACCUSED: Okay. Fair enough.
27 THE COMMISSIONER: You remain silent. You had your
20
1 say. Let him have his say.
2 MR. MELNEY: To --let me --let me try and put
3 this into some perspective. To argue that he's not a
4 person is one thing. To that you're not a
5 person because the legislation is wrong or to
6 contradict or --to chal the legislation in effect
7 a constitutional issue, and there are rules and
8 guidelines for constitutional issues, one being proper
9 notice under the Constitutional Notice Regulation, the
10 other in terms of an obligation under the Judicature
11 Act to notify the proper areas of government to which
12 you are addressing the argument, and that is namely the
13 constitutional law section of Alberta Justice.
14 THE COMMISSIONER: And the Federal
15 MR. MELNEY: Yes.
16 THE COMMISSIONER: --Department of Justice.
17 MR. MELNEY: Yes. And beyond that --I mean, if
18 the defendant is making that argument, he would --he
19 would, of course, be required to make those proper
20 notices. I know that he has referred in part in his
21 argument to some material he may have sent. I'm not
22 sure what all that material is or what it contains, but
23 it clearly wasn't presented to the Crown and didn't
24 trickle its way to me to deal with here today on these
25 charges. So if it was the defendant's intention to
26 challenge the legislation or present some other Charter
27 issue as to what is person or is not, none of that
21
1 has –
2 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, as I understand it, -MR.
3 MELNEY: --come to the Crown.
4 THE COMMISSIONER: --he is not only challenging the
5 legislation, but the definition of person and the
6 jurisdiction of this court as well.
7 Is that correct?
8 THE ACCUSED: Well, Your Worship, my only concern
9 here specifically today, what brought me here is the
10 definition of the word "person." I was merely --see ..
11 I was merely trying to help the situation by suggesting
12 that if in the Court's opinion, that that is what the
13 definition of the word "person" is, then that the
14 that the Court would help me to fix the legislature if
15 the legislature is wrong --legis --the --yeah, if
16 if the legislature enacted that incorrectly. My-that
17 is my only real purpose here.
18 Now, regarding the jurisdiction, I believe that I
19 understand the jurisdiction of this court and that I
20 haven't heard the Court say otherwise regarding the
21 jurisdiction of this court, so I'm not challenging the
22 jurisdiction of this court at all, Your Worship. I'm
23 merely saying the reason why I came here today
24 specifically, as I said, was because from what I can -from
25 what I've read, the definition of the word
26 "person" in the -in Alberta's Interpretation Act,
27 which applies to the Traffic Safety Act, as far as I
22
1 understand, does not apply to me.
2 MR. MELNEY: And of course, legislative
3 interpretation is the subject of an argument and not
4 necessarily a challenge in another way, so that would
5 be something to deal with at the end of the case. If
6 he's suggesting a person named so and so isn't a person
7 under the -
8 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, it -
9 MR. MELNEY: Actually , it is --it's a mixed
10 argument actually. If you boil it down, it’s still a
11 mixed argument because he fails to recognize - some
12 constitutional issues.
13 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, in my judgment, the
14 definition of person is firstly a human being and,
15 secondly, includes all of these other things that the
16 Interpretation Act has listed, i.e., corporations,
17 heirs, executors, et cetera, so they are added to the
18 definition of person. They are not restricting the
19 definition of person to only those things, and the use
20 of the word "includes" in the definition of person, as
21 I understand the interpretation of statute, does not
22 automatically exclude everything else. Okay?
23 THE ACCUSED: In that case, Your Worship, since
24 there was a process that I was not aware of in my
25 research, in order to provide notice to the
26 prosecution, may I be given --may be allowed time in
27 order to pursue that process and issue notice so that
23
1 the prosecution may have these documents so that I may
2 submit them to the Court so that you may have them in
3 the future? And is there a possibility for me to have
4 assistance in finding out how to do that?
5 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I have suggested a way you
6 can go about doing that, but you do not want to do
7 that.
8 THE ACCUSED: Well, Your Worship, I'm reminded of
9 a --a third world dictatorship, where the only way in
10 which one may achieve peace or justice and be left
11 alone is to payoff the right people.
12 THE COMMISSIONER: Well -
13 THE ACCUSED: And if the only way for me to
14 follow this process of yours is to pay members of the
15 legal society, members of the bar who are part of that
16 community that I am not a part of and --or for me to
17 find out how to do this is for me to become one of your
18 members of your society, then I would have to deal with
19 that. But is that the way --is that the case?
20 THE COMMISSIONER: No. You do not have to hire a
21 lawyer if you do not want to, but you then run the risk
22 that, number one, you are doing what you are doing here
23 out of sequence, out of proper procedural rules and so
24 on. You are running the risk of not knowing how to do
25 things properly, not knowing how to put your
26 documentation together properly, not knowing that you
27 need to give notice to the constitutional law section
24
1 of both the federal and provincial departments of
2 justice. You run that risk.
3 THE ACCUSED: So
4 THE COMMISSIONER: But there is absolutely no -nothing
5 that says a person cannot represent
6 themselves
7 THE ACCUSED: Well,
8 THE COMMISSIONER: -in this country.
9 THE ACCUSED: -Your Worship, -
10 THE COMMISSIONER: Anyone can represent themselves.
11 THE ACCUSED: -I would rather not like to
12 represent myself. I'd like to present myself
13 specifically. Now, if -I mean, as -as a human
14 being with flaws,
15 THE COMMISSIONER: Well,
16 THE ACCUSED: -I mean, am I not allowed –
17 THE COMMISSIONER: -let me put it this way, let
18 me -let me change it
19 THE ACCUSED: -to make procedural errors and
20 have assistance from those that they claim authority
21 over me to help me, because if I do -if I am under –
22 if I am subject to their authority and their power,
23 then are they not just as responsible for my ignorance
24 when I have attempted contact?
25 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, to begin with, you cannot
26 expect -number one, I cannot assist you in preparing
27 your argument. All I can do is give you some
25
1 suggestion and guidance and direction as to what you
2 might do. Okay? But I cannot tell you how to put your
3 argument together.
4 THE ACCUSED: And that's –
5 THE COMMISSIONER: That is your job.
6 THE ACCUSED: That's -I'm
7 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay.
8 THE ACCUSED: I'm all right
9 THE COMMISSIONER: That is your lawyer's job, is to
10 figure that out and to do it properly. It is not the
11 judge's job every step along, every time this comes
12 into trial to say, Well, okay, you need to take this
13 procedural step, then this procedural I and you
14 missed this one and this one back here.
15 THE ACCUSED: Where can I find all of the
16 procedural information that will tell me what I need to
17 do in order to follow the procedures?
18 THE COMMISSIONER: Well
19 THE ACCUSED: Do I have to go to law school -THE
20 COMMISSIONER: Well, that would certainly help.
21 THE ACCUSED: -and become a member -~
22 THE COMMISSIONER: But –
23 THE ACCUSED: -of the society?
24 THE COMMISSIONER: The simplest -simpler solution
25 would be to simply contact a lawyer and talk to a
26 lawyer. You may well find a lawyer who is willing to
27 take this issue on a pro bono basis. Pro bono means
26
1 free –
2 THE ACCUSED: I understand.
3 THE COMMISSIONER: -basis.
4 THE ACCUSED: I know that word.
5 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay. They may find that this is
6 an issue that intrigues them enough that they are
7 prepared to do that. But you also have to understand
8 that a lawyer, in all likelihood, has a family to feed
9 just like everybody else has a family to feed or
10 themselves to feed, and so they may expect some
11 payment, but that is no different than somebody who is
12 running a corner gas station or convenience store. You
13 cannot expect them to be giving you free gas or giving
14 you free food. They have to pay for it. They have to
15 make a living. A lawyer has to pay his rent. He has
16 to pay for his computer, his paper, his pens, et
17 cetera. So-
18 THE ACCUSED: So your –
19 THE COMMISSIONER: -it is your -it is your
20 decision whether or not you decide to seek someone to
21 help you present your case in a proper fashion, but it
22 is not the Court's responsibility or the Court's job,
23 and in fact, it would place the Court in a conflict of
24 interest if the Court was to assist new preparing your
25 argument.
26 THE ACCUSED: Well, Your Worship, as I said
27 earlier, is the Court to allow to me to do
27
1 that, to give me the time –
2 THE COMMISSIONER: I am prepared to grant you an
3 adjournment so that you can prepare proper written
4 argument and make your submissions properly.
5 THE ACCUSED: Because if -as –
6 THE COMMISSIONER: But I
7 THE ACCUSED: As –
8 THE COMMISSIONER: But I suggest to you it probably
9 would not be in this court because essentially you are
10 raising constitutional issues here, and this court does
11 not have jurisdiction over constitutional issues.
12 Okay?
13 THE ACCUSED: Right.
14 THE COMMISSIONER: So -
15 THE ACCUSED: So how -
16 THE COMMISSIONER: it would be Provincial Court
17 would have.
18 THE ACCUSED: Okay. And what sort of a time
19 frame do I have in order to prepare?
20 THE COMMISSIONER: Well
21 THE ACCUSED: I mean, if you're willing to grant
22 that, Your Worship.
23 THE COMMISSIONER: Right now, we are scheduling trial
24 dates into February, so that gives you several months.
25 The - you would have to go down to the criminal
26 clerks, I believe, and get a date from them.
27 But they are probably closed now, aren't they?
28
1 THE COURT CLERK: Yes, sir.
2 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay.
3 MR. MELNEY: Well, he's also going to need to
4 follow the Constitutional Notice Regulation,
5 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
6 MR. MELNEY: -which has deadlines and
7 guidelines, in order to make that argument.
8 THE ACCUSED: Would those deadlines and
9 guidelines be from today or from some point in the
10 past?
11 THE COMMISSIONER: Oh, they would not be –
12 THE ACCUSED: Oh.
13 THE COMMISSIONER: from the past, no.
14 THE ACCUSED: Okay. Because I mean, if -if
15 it's a regulation that's been published same as every
16 other,
17 THE COMMISSIONER: It is published.
18 THE ACCUSED: then I can find that. Then I
19 can find those information, and I mean, if I to a
20 lawyer and if a lawyer's willing to me -but I
21 mean, all I would like -all I'm asking for right now,
22 since you've said, you know -from what you've said,
23 the only option that I have, if it's -if I'm
24 understanding you correctly, is to do this another day,
25 where I have the opportunity to provide notice to the
26 prosecution and to the court itself.
27 THE COMMISSIONER: I think that would be the
29
1 appropriate way to deal with this, and then the Crown
2 will have an opportunity to see what your arguments are
3 and will have an opportunity to respond to those
4 arguments, and similarly, then a Court can actually see
5 it in writing and can read your argument, can read
6 their argument over, and make a better decision than I
7 can off the top of my head at this point. Okay?
8 THE ACCUSED: Very well. I mean, if what I've
9 submitted is not enough, then yeah.
10 MR. MELNEY: Well, he's missing part of it. He
11 hasn't submitted anything to the Crown.
12 THE COMMISSIONER: No.
13 MR. MELNEY: So we're not in a position to say
14 anything or argue anything.
15 THE COMMISSIONER: No.
16 Can we obtain a new date, Madam Clerk?
17 THE COURT CLERK: In traffic or in criminal?
18 THE COMMISSIONER: Well, let's –
19 MR. MELNEY: We'll have to do traffic, I think.
20 THE COMMISSIONER: Let us obtain a date for trial in
21 traffic court or –
22 THE COURT CLERK: I did call for a date. I've been
23 given a date of November 7th.
24 THE COMMISSIONER: Oh.
25 MR. MELNEY: How much time do we have for that?
26 THE COURT CLERK: There are 14 slots available. No?
27 More?
30
1 MR. MELNEY: We need a half day
2 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
3 THE COURT CLERK: Then
4 MR. MELNEY: at least.
5 THE COURT CLERK: -February 24th? Sorry. She gave
6 me the courtroom -the date, but I did not get a
7 courtroom number or time, and she's gone.
8 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay. Why don't we do this, why
9 don't you try calling her quickly just in case she
10 might still be at her desk.
11 THE ACCUSED: Your Worship, how would I obtain a
12 copy of this proceeding today, of the recording?
13 THE COMMISSIONER: You can order a transcript from the
14 clerks downstairs.
15 THE ACCUSED: From the clerks downstairs. Thank
16 you.
17 THE COMMISSIONER: She is gone? No?
18 THE COURT CLERK: There's no one there.
19 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay.
20 MR. MELNEY: We could bring it back into court
21 to speak to.
22 THE COMMISSIONER: I think we will have to do that.
23 Mr. Koornhof, because the schedule clerk has already
24 left, we cannot --we cannot schedule a new trial date
25 for this at this point. When are you going to be
26 can you come back downtown another day this week?
27 THE ACCUSED: Not this week, no, Your Worship.
31
1 THE COMMISSIONER: Next week?
2 THE ACCUSED: I would imagine that the courts are
3 not open on Saturdays, correct?
4 THE COMMISSIONER: No. Not yet. But that is under
5 discussion as well, to make it more convenient to the
6 public.
7 THE ACCUSED: Okay. See. Well, let's -let's
8 say Friday next week.
9 THE COMMISSIONER: 9:30 or 2?
10 THE ACCUSED: 2:00 would be better.
11 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay. Friday, August --what would
12 that be the 29th at 2 p.m. in courtroom 272 for
13 fixation of a trial date. Okay. And that is all it
14 is, is to schedule a date. And in the meantime, you
15 can look up the Constitutional Regulation and see what
16 the requirements are for that, because if you are going
17 to be making a constitutional argument, you will also
18 need to go over to the criminal clerks, Provincial
19 Court criminal, and get a date from them in order to
20 make the constitutional argument in front of a
21 Provincial Court judge. Okay? And that hopefully
22 would be --if you do that, then we can schedule a
23 trial date here that would be after that date.
24 THE ACCUSED: All right.
25 THE COMMISSIONER: Okay?
26 THE COURT CLERK: So, sir, am I to stick with the
27 date?
32
1 MR. MELNEY: That brings to end a rather
2 eventful day, sir.
3 THE COMMISSIONER: We are adjourned.
4 ------------------------------------------------------------------
5 PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED UNTIL 2:00 P.M., 29 AUGUST, 2008
6 ------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|