|
| COURT RULED: CANADIANS HAVE NO PROPERTY RIGHTS - Sunday, August 10, 2003 at 13:11 |
|
COURT RULED: CANADIANS HAVE NO PROPERTY RIGHTS - Tuesday, July 29, 2003 at 15:37 NEWS RELEASE - July 29, 2003
Yorkton - Today, Garry Breitkreuz, Official Opposition Critic for Firearms and Property Rights, denounced a Supreme Court decision saying that the government has the power to take anyone's property without due process and without compensation simply by passing an "unambiguous" law. "We have just lost one of our most important freedoms necessary for the existence of a truly free and democratic society. The right to life and the right to property go hand-in-hand - you can't have one without the other. When Parliament resumes sitting in September, Canadian Alliance will be introducing a motion calling for property rights to be entrenched in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms," promised Breitkreuz. What got Breitkreuz so riled was the Supreme Court's July 17th judgment in the class-action suit Authorson v. Canada in which the Supremes ruled in favour of the federal government and against mentally disabled war veterans (see supporting documentation). The government amended the Veteran Affairs Act to avoid paying hundreds of millions in interest on pension benefits the government had held in trust for about 30,000 veterans. The Supreme Court The Supreme Court ruling also stated: "Lastly, while substantive rights may stem from due process, the Bill of Rights does not protect against the expropriation of property by the passage of unambiguous legislation." Breitkreuz asked, "So if the property rights guarantees in the Canadian Bill of Rights don't protect an individual's fundamental property rights, what good are they? They even ruled that the Bill of Rights 'does not impose on Parliament the duty to provide a hearing before the enactment of legislation.' Once again, we have a court ruling - this one by the highest court in the land - that demonstrates an urgent need for my Private Members' Bill C-313 (see supporting documentation) calling for amendments to strengthen the property rights protection in the Canadian Bill of Rights. If my bill were law, at least the Liberals would have to get a two-thirds majority in the House to pass any law that runs roughshod over our property rights," explained Breitkreuz. "This first step in property rights protection in federal law is required while we are trying to convince seven provinces with 50% of the population to approve our proposed constitutional amendment to entrench property rights in the Charter." "This Supreme Court ruling means that the Liberals can simply ram a law through Parliament giving themselves the right and the power to confiscate each and every bit of Canadian-owned property falling under federal law without paying a dime in compensation to the legal owners," warned Breitkreuz. "This Supreme Court ruling should raise concerns for all Canadians over their ability to enjoy their own property including the fruits of their labour. What more evidence do you need that Liberals are undoing everything our ancestors fought for, for hundreds of years?" "This wasn't just another bad ruling by the Supreme Court. A free and democratic society needs to have the best protection of property rights or else all is at risk. We must entrench property rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the Canadian Alliance has repeatedly called for." -30-
SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT
|