Yesterday I received confirmation from the Justice of the Peace Review Council that a review / Investigation has been launched. The investigation / review is being done by a committee consisting of 3 individuals in each case. Here is the response:
Now why didn't the Justice of the Peace Review Council commence their investigation into the crime of Obstructing Justice by the above named 3 Worships from the first complaint letter? A very viable and plausible reason would be that the council already knew that what occurred on the three occasions that I appeared before these Justices of the Peace was the crime of obstructing justice found under section 139.2 of the criminal code of Canada. Something the council also realized is that what happened brought the Hamilton Courts into disrepute ( bad repute; low regard; disfavor ).
The 3 Worships have brought the courts into disrepute with their actions and the only way to bring the courts back into high regard is to remove these Justices of the Peace for their actions and charge them with the crimes they committed.
Lets recap the code of conduct that is required by all Justices of the Peace:
1. THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE IN COURT
1.1 Justices of the peace must be impartial and objective in the discharge of their judicial
Justices of the peace should not be influenced by partisan interests, public pressure or fear of criticism.
Justices of the peace should maintain their objectivity and shall not, by words or
conduct, manifest favour, bias or prejudice towards any party or interest.
1.2 Justices of the peace have a duty to follow the law.
Justices of the peace have a duty to apply the relevant law to the facts and circumstances of the cases before the court and to render justice within
the framework of the law.
1.3 Justices of the peace will endeavour to maintain order and decorum in court.
Justices of the peace must strive to be patient, dignified and courteous in performing the duties of judicial office and shall carry out their role
with integrity, appropriate firmness and honour.
The rest of the code of conduct can be found here:
Now just from the first few sections of the code of conduct which all Justices of the Peace must adhere to does it seem like they have acted within the rules set out in the code of conduct?
The rules say they have a duty to follow the law. They did not! Current consolidated law under the Courts of Justice Act Section 136.2(b) is clear that a party acting in person, a lawyer or a reporter has the right to record the proceedings to supplement their notes. The only part that is arguable before a Judge or a Justice of the Peace is the manner or device that the above noted individuals have the right to use.
This section and the rights afforded to all individuals appearing before a court who are acting for themselves was confirmed on October 8, 2010 by Judge Speyer when my rights were respected and I recorded the proceedings that I was involved in before Her Honourable Court.
What is not clear is why any Judge or Justice of the Peace would violate the Courts of Justice Act?
More to follow, next complaint to the Attorney General , He might want to take a very good look at page 5 of the court transcripts in my appearance on August 13, 2010.