TORONTO – Today and tomorrow, the Federal Court of Canada will conduct an expedited hearing on a [Constitutional, legal] challenge to Justin Trudeau’s prorogation of Parliament on January 7.
The fact that the Court, as per decision by Chief Justice Crompton, has acquiesced to the hearing is significant in itself.
No matter the outcome, the findings will have an important bearing on Canada’s governance structure, in both the short and long term.
The action was brought forward by Applicants D.J.Mackinnon and A. Lavranos, when Donald Trump, then not yet sworn in as President of the USA, signaled tariffs of 25% and measures deemed detrimental to Canadian sovereignty and its economy. In a nutshell, they argued that prorogation essentially deprived Canada and its individual citizens of a cohesive, coherent leadership response to the threat posed by the impending Trumpian tariffs and threats.
Democracy Watch, The Canadian Constitutional Law Initiative of the University of Ottawa Law Centre and The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association were granted intervenor status. The Canada Attorney General is defending the Government’s (Respondent) position.
A reading of the Court file No: T-60-25, the Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Respondent, suggests a defence reliant on the distinction between law (legislation – loosely speaking, obligation) and convention (political practice of convenience) in the practice of Canada’s Parliament.
Furthermore, it suggests that the Prime Minister, as the voice of the government, cannot be held legally responsible for advice (s)he may give the Crown (Governor General). The only remedy to a prime minister’s advice (or legislative proposals) is a defeat in the House of Commons and a consequent election to assess the public’s level of approval or condemnation. In that context, his announcement of personal resignation from office has only incidental significance.
Besides, our Constitution (law) only requires that Parliament sit one day per year. In practice, convention, may, and does, dictate differently as per political convenience.
The hearing starts at 9:30 am.
In the pic above, the completely deserted House of Commons (photo: Hutima – https://commons.wikimedia.org/) with two writings added by us (in Italian and English)
