I thought everyone might like to read-up on the important press that was served
out to the public by this AMAZING woman, attorney, Janice Switlo. She has been
an amazing help to Jacqueline through out all the affairs in Canada. She asked
that we circulate this widely. This article from her also contains a great deal
of info, helpful to all of us in understanding how the true "workings" in Canada
proceed and NEED to be based upon the issue of Tribal Sovereignty.
blessings,
Wahela Bluejay
This is urgently brought to your attention and you are asked to distribute
this accordingly:
"Here come de judge
Calamity's child at Caledonia: it's no Laugh-In' matter"
by Janice G.A.E. Switlo
This pertains to Mr. Justice Marshall's order to attend his court tomorrow,
June 1, 2006, regarding the Six Nations/Caledonia situation.
May 31, 2006 Here come de judge
---------------------------------
Calamity's child at Caledonia: it's no Laugh-In' matter
---------------------------------
Janice G.A.E. Switlo
"Heyeah come duh judge" was the signature shtick of boisterous, raucous
comedian Pigmeat Markham (Dewey Markham) April 16, 1904 - December 13, 1981 that
mocks the court. Markham sat on an elevated judicial bench wearing a black
graduation cap and gown for robes and would render his orders and reasons for
judgment by leaning over the bench and hitting the accused with an inflated
bladder-balloon: "The judge is high as a Georgia pine! Everybody's goin' to
jail today! And to show you I don't mean nobody no good this morning, I'm givin'
myself six months! And if I'm gonna do six months, Mr. District Attorney, you
can imagine what you're gonna do!" He made multiple appearances on the Ed
Sullivan Show beginning in the 1950s, the television show that because it aired
past a 4-year-old's bedtime I was forced to surreptitiously watch through the
bars of the heating vent underneath my bed that opened onto the other side of
the wall in perfect line of sight with our black
and white TV in the living room. (Imagine my shock and hustle the evening of
February 9, 1964 when I heard my late brother, Gary Switlo (Concert Box
Offices/Ticketmaster), work incredibly hard to convince my mother to wake me up
to watch the historical first American televised appearance of The Beatles, the
beginning of Beatlemania. Why would I want to see some bugs, I thought. I was
hoping Topo Gigo the mouse puppet would be on. Fortunately it was Gary who
discovered my ploy when he came running down the hall to get me up. He kept my
secret. He was forever after, my hero.) Markham's fame was enhanced when Sammy
Davis Jr. popularized Markham's "Here come de judge" line on NBC's television
comedy/variety show, Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In, broadcast for 140 episodes
January 22, 1968 - May 14, 1973. In March 2006, I provided the following
courtesy warning to Inspector Brain Haggith of the OPP, to Mr. Toby Barrett
(Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant) MPP, to Mr. Bruder, solicitor
of record for Douglas Creek Estates developer Henco Industries Limited, and to
reporter Paul Legall: "Dear Inspector Brian Haggith, You are referred to
in the following article as speaking for Cayuga OPP and I do you the courtesy of
providing to you that which I have provided in response thereto: Paul Legall,
'Native protesters brought in more firewood and erected two new shelters,
including a tepee, as they continue their land protest. Criminal charges could
follow injunction: lawyer,' The Hamilton Spectator, March 11, 2006. 'The
following is to better explain the situation. Background on the protectorate
duties of the Crown is contained in my article, "To serve and protect: Her
Majesty's obligations"
www.switlo.com/opinion.php?selected=74 I do you
the courtesy of explaining application thereof to the current situation you are
reporting on. Her Majesty's courts owe a higher duty to this Indigenous
Nation, a protectorate duty that constitutes the
highest law of the land. Once this duty is triggered, for example, by informing
any of Her Majesty's servants, such as the RCMP (or other police force) and Her
courts and judge(s) that it is their land and the subject developer is not
entitled to be present on the land for any purpose, whereby public notice as the
current land use displays is taken as constructive notice, subject developer
must be kept from the land and not the reverse. This obligation is higher than
the civil obligation that results from the civil injunction application of the
subject developer. There is no ground for criminal sanction, Her Majesty's
servants are to be respectfully reminded. This is not some simple matter between
two of Her Majesty's people/entities. This is a matter of Her Majesty's
relationship with an Indigenous Nation and Her duties to protect said Indigenous
Nation and their land from the actions such as this developer. A higher law is
thereby triggered Her Majesty's servants are
reminded, and the court must respect it above that of the unilateral domestic
action of one of Her Majesty's people/entities, i.e. the subject developer. It
is not for the Indigenous Nation to deal with Her entities such as the subject
developer as that is for Her Majesty to address - She is to remove the offender
from their land and to protect them from further harm. The original injunction
application is an abuse of process and ought to be set aside I would instruct
the court. To build upon it by declaring failure to obey it a criminal matter is
to tarnish Her Majesty's Honour and to cause Her Majesty to fail in Her duties
to the Indigenous Nation, and ultimately, by failing to uphold treaty is to
threaten the peace, which She must not do. Indeed She has committed to the
international community through convention and to Her subjects through
constitutional documents that she will not threaten the peace. It is therefore
far more complicated than the image of some
Indigenous nationals and a few structures on a road and than your readers may
appreciate, or for that matter, this particular court may appreciate given the
subject developer's lawyer would not likely have advised Her court of this, but,
ought to. His oath is to protect Her Majesty's interests and Her Honour - that
extends to preserving and not threatening Her relations with this Indigenous
Nation. He is rather, with respect, in a conflict of interest, for to make
application to Her court as suggested in your article, to receive criminal
sanction for failure to comply with the civil injunction, is to request Her
court to order Her servants to cause Her Majesty to fail to protect this
Indigenous Nation.' I trust you appreciate the implications of this serving as
a reminder of said duty to you on behalf of Cayuga OPP."
So just who is the rebel in this troubling scenario pitting Her Majesty's
servants and governments against Her Majesty's allies? Certainly not those
working to strengthen and mend Her Majesty's relationships that are governed by
treaty, including treaties with Indigenous nations such as the Six Nations and
treaties with member states of the United Nations, and by other components of
international law, which constrain Canada's constitution and governments and
which are not justiciable in Mr. Justice Marshall's domestic courtroom,
including those exasperated by years of neglect to the covenant chain who felt
compelled, as Her Majesty's ally, to bring attention to the very serious threat
to the peace being posed to Canadians and consequent threat to their economy by
the actions of Her Majesty's servants and governments by becoming very visible
at Caledonia instead of being tucked inside some forgotten rusting filing
cabinets or being bantered about by equally ill-equipped
domestic lawyers no matter their respective representation. How so terribly
ironic and dangerous that Mr. Justice Marshall, a servant of Her Majesty who
swore to protect, argues that he must take action to preserve the peace but that
that very action may threaten the peace and risk conveying to the world that no
rule of law operates in Canada. "Ontario Superior Court Justice David
Marshall has taken the highly unusual step of ordering the OPP, the attorney
general of Ontario, natives, the developers and other parties to a special court
session Thursday to explain why his orders are being flouted. It's not clear
what effect it will have on the ongoing negotiations to end the dispute.
Osgoode Hall law professor Alan Young said he can't remember another instance
when a judge has taken the initiative of pressing for the enforcement of his own
order. He added judges usually assume their orders will be obeyed and maintain
an 'out-of-sight-out-of-mind' attitude toward
enforcement. 'The reason for this unusual step is because there are
injunctive and other orders of this court that remain outstanding,' Marshall
said. 'The Superior Court of Justice has the ultimate responsibility to ensure
that peace in the community is maintained under the rule of law -- hence this
court calls the parties in order to further resolution of these matters.' In
his ruling, Marshall referred to an injunction that Henco Industries Limited
obtained in March to evict native protesters from Douglas Creek Estates and a
separate injunction that Railink Canada Ltd. obtained from Marshall on May 4.
In addition to the OPP commissioner and the attorney general, Marshall has
summoned lawyers for the developers, Railink Canada Ltd., the County of
Haldimand and the Haldimand Law Society. He has also called on the Six Nations
elected band council and the traditional confederacy chiefs to appear. The judge
notes, however, that the confederacy has not responded to
the jurisdiction of the court. Young said that the party who applied for the
injunction -- the developers of Douglas Creek Estates -- would normally press
for compliance. In this case, however, he believes Marshall may have seen
himself as a party because the flouting of his orders would constitute contempt
in 'the face of the court.' '(Because the flouting) caused the disrespect to
the court, you can get out of that passive shell and take the matter into your
own hands,' he said. Young does not know if Marshall can require enforcement."
Paul Legall, "Land foes ordered to court," The Hamilton Spectator, May 30, 2006.
Who is the reckless one, Calamity's child? Certainly not those trying to
resolve outstanding issues between allies so as to create certainty and
financial stability. Rather, he is reckless, who bound by duty and limited by
jurisdiction, would undermine the entire economy of Canada by holding that in
order to calm the panic that he assumes will result but is not evident (perhaps
rising personally as the result of being an allegedly property owner in the
subject Caledonia area) as holders of property interests through Her Majesty
appreciate the limits of their titles, that treaty commitments requiring
diplomacy be immediately dispensed with and domestic law be made to supercede.
This would be like saying that the rule of law must be broken in order to
preserve the rule of law and that there is justification in threatening the
peace in order to preserve the peace. It is circular reasoning, illogical and
nonsensical. "Got your mother in a whirl 'cause
She's not sure if you're a boy or a girl ...
Rebel Rebel, how could they know? ...
You've torn your dress, your face is a mess
You can't get enough, but enough ain't the test
You've got transmission and a live wire
Got your cue lines and a handful of ludes
You wanna be there when they count up the dues
And I love your dress
You're a juvenile success
Because your face is a mess
So how could they know?
I said, how could they know?
To what you wanna know
Calamitys child, chi-chile, chi-chile
Where'd you wanna go?
Can I do for you? Looks like you've been there too
'Cause you've torn your dress
And your face is a mess
Ooo, ooo, your face is a mess
Ooo, ooo, so how could they know?
How could they know? Hah
Hah-hah" "Rebel Rebel," David Bowie
"Taken at face value, 'Rebel Rebel' is a song about the victory of youth,
polymorphous sexuality and loud rock music over adulthood and societal
conventions. More viscerally, the rebellion taking place is clearly personal,
based on pure lust/love/attraction without deeper meaning or political subtext.
All the main characters desire is to escape the mundane. ... the subject of the
song becomes more one of freedom from constraint than some kind of prelude to
sexual activity. Even better, he's left enough doubt about exactly who or even
what the object of his affection is that it can be applied to almost any
situation. Is he talking about a boy? Is he talking about a girl? Is he talking
about a girl-boy or a boy-girl? Is he talking about a rock star? A kid? Kid A?
Me? You? Himself? In the end it doesn't really matter." Mallory O'Donnell,
Stylus Magazine, February 22, 2006
Whatever Justice Marshall ends up talking about in his courtroom Thursday,
June 1, 2006 doesn't really matter. What will crucially matter is who lives up
to their duties, to the Crown, to protect. Mr. Justice Marshall is one of the
very many who owe duties. "I am writing to you in my capacity as president
of the Haldimand Law Association, which represents lawyers practising law in
Haldimand County. The refusal of the Ontario Provincial Police to comply with
and enforce valid and outstanding court orders issued by the Ontario Superior
Court of Justice in respect of the land occupation by natives of the Douglas
Creek Estates development is of great concern to our membership. We believe
the failure of the OPP to enforce direct court orders has serious implications
in respect of the administration of justice, both real and perceived, and the
rights of landowners not only in Caledonia and Haldimand County, but [also]
throughout the province. We understand that the
actions of the natives in this matter are motivated by frustration by the
process and manner in which native land claims and other related issues have
been dealt with by the federal and provincial governments. However, this does
not permit these individuals to ignore court orders and to violate the law of
this province and country. A fundamental characteristic of any democratic
civilization is the governance of the rule of law. When the rule of law comes
under attack, so do the rights and freedoms of every individual in that society.
The rule of law is under attack in Haldimand County. The powers that be, having
been entrusted to ensure the operation of the rule of law and to protect the
rights and freedoms of the residents of Canada, are either refusing or
neglecting to act." Michael McLachlin, President, Haldimand Law Association.
"Preserving the rule of law," The Hamilton Spectator, May 25, 2006
Quite correct Mr. McLachlin, "A fundamental characteristic of any
democratic civilization is the governance of the rule of law." Now, with
respect, your members need to review just what is the law and it should disturb
you and them that it may be your action that threatens the rule of law and not
those being the subject of the injunction orders that you speak of. "If this
all seems a little bit dramatic, then we ask the reader to consider what their
reaction would be if protesters or individuals, whether native or of other
origin, attended at your residence and summarily evicted you from your property
without any legal right to do so and those responsible for enforcing the law
refused to take any action to assist. This is what has happened and is
happening in Caledonia right now." Ibid.
Mr. McLachlin, this is not what is happening in Caledonia right now and it is
reckless and provocative of you to suggest it and to suggest that Her Majesty's
allies have no legal rights. You must live to a higher standard in our society
by the nature of your duty and this misleads the very public that relies on all
those who have made oath to Her Majesty. But in fairness to Mr. McLachlin, is
there to be expected anything different than the above reaction of the lawyers
he is speaking on behalf of when domestic lawyers in Canada were closed off from
pursuing the necessary skills, knowledge and experience in the matters of
controversies between Her Majesty and Her allies, in matters of the relationship
whether de jure by treaty or de facto, as the result of parliamentary action
more than 80 years ago to prevent assistance being given to Her Majesty's allies
in such matters by making it illegal for lawyers and others to be retained by
Indians? Today that no longer is the
case and so there is no longer any excuse to act and speak on matters of the
Crown pertaining to Her allies unless fully skilled to do so. Preserve the
Crown and all that depends on the Crown, or tarnish it and risk all? That is
what is being decided directly or indirectly, right now, in Caledonia. And it
effects far more than the clients of Haldimand County lawyers, the Caledonia
community and the province of Ontario. Understanding this and acting
consistent with duties to protect are unfortunately difficult today for lawyers
and the judiciary in Canada. Improving this will lead to certainty and
prosperity. You do not polish precious metal with barbed metal or even with
steel wool or scouring pads - that will do damage, often times permanent damage
that proves very difficult to repair. That is the effect that Mr. Justice's
actions tomorrow, June 1, 2006, perhaps provoked instead of aided by lawyers who
like me swore an oath to Her Majesty to protect, may have
on the ongoing negotiations to end the dispute. (It is expected that the breach
of appropriate diplomatic protocol exercised by Mr. Marshall regarding the
Confederacy Chiefs may be brought to his attention as perhaps will comments and
explanation be offered as help in how to proceed, respectfully, as befitting
matters between Her Majesty and Her allies.) If so, Mr. Marshall's actions
would go well beyond any reasonable exercise of judicial activism engaged in for
the benefit of Her Majesty, Her interests and that of Her people, in the
interests of peace and the protection of the rule of law, and it would be
interesting to see the reaction of Her Majesty's Privy Council Prime Minister
Stephen Harper, leader of the federal Conservative minority government, to such
action by Mr. Justice Marshall given not only Prime Minister Harper's high duty
but also the opinion of some Conservative members as to judicial activism in
Canada. I hate to have to breaks the news to the
investment community but it looks like it's about to get far worse here in
Canada than was put to Ontario Securities Commission chairman David Wilson
addressing the Canadian Club of Montreal on May 29, 2006: "After his speech,
Mr. Wilson took issue with the argument raised in some quarters that Canada has
an international image as a Wild West for securities crime." Bertrand Marotte,
"OSC chairman zeroes in on executive pay," The Globe and Mail, May 30, 2006, p.
B1 (Report on Business)
It may very well be, very shortly, the Wild West in all things in Canada, not
just the TSX, with the rule of law no where to be found at high noon. And that
is all I have to say. Janice G.A.E. Switlo "Rebel Rebel" is from David
Bowie's album Diamond Dogs (1974), originally intended for a theatrical
production based on George Orwell's novel 1984 and incorporating Bowie's vision
of a post-apocalyptic world. Orwell's estate denied Bowie the rights and so the
1984 theme is prominent through Bowie songs on the second half of Diamond Dogs:
"Rebel Rebel", "1984," "We Are the Dead," "Sweet Thing/Candidate/Sweet Thing
(Reprise)," and "Big Brother". In February 1997, David Bowie became the first
to sell his persona on the stock market, shortly after his 50th birthday.
Fahnenstock & Co issued 10-year Bowie bonds on expected royalty income to the
society set up to hold his transferred rights that he had kept control over
since 1975, generating income through licensing the use
of a catalogue of hundreds of his songs.