|
November 22, 2004
THE RED HILL BATTLE IS NOT OVER
The city's plan to press contempt of court charges against individuals, and proceed with a lawsuit against federal government employees, proves that the Red Hill battle is not over. It continues to be very vigorously prosecuted by the pro-expressway side.
The people of conscience facing draconian penalties acted sincerely on behalf of the public good and without any intent or hope of personal gain. Why are they being persecuted?
Why is this happening?
This is obviously a vindictive campaign, but it has other purposes than just raw revenge. The means may be to demonize opponents of the expressway as evil people whose mission was to harm Hamilton, but the end objective is to create a false history that blames opponents for the enormous costs of the expressway. In this way they hope to duck responsibility for the financial disaster which the project is already imposing on the city of Hamilton, and instead tranfer the blame onto the shoulders of those who tried to prevent this disaster.
Ironically, the means chosen by the pro-expressway elements will itself impose further costs on the taxpapers. It appears that the key advocate of the lawsuits is David Estrin and the Gowlings law firm who have essentially been driving the expressway train for several years. If councillors endorse their strategy, the only certain result will be to further fill the pockets of the lawyers who are arguing for it.
Suing federal employees for doing their job
The resolution going to City Council on Wednesday evening has seven parts. The first one retroactively ratifies the filing last April by Estrin of a $75 million lawsuit against over 60 federal civil servants and four former cabinet ministers. The second approves further proceeding with this suit. Irrespective of the aim of this legal action, the clear effect is to impose a chill on employees in the Environment and Fisheries ministries and convince them that it is personally dangerous for them to enforce federal environmental laws. This is the sort of legal stunt one would expect from a private corporation. It is doubly odious when it is pursued by a government.
Of course, the only winners in any government against government lawsuit are the lawyers. It is quite sad how Hamilton 's city councillors simple-mindedly agree to a scheme that will only fill the pockets of the lawyers who are proposing the scheme. In addition, there is no justification for the city's lawsuit. Given the extreme accusations made in the suit, it would be appropriate for those named to sue the city for libel.
The third part of the council resolution offers to settle the lawsuit out of court. This is because the city knows it doesn't have a case, but wants to justify receiving federal monies for the expressway. It's possible that it will achieve this goal because of the close political relationship between Di Ianni and Liberal house leader Tony Valeri, and because Gowlings was one of the largest contributors to the leadership campaign of Prime Minister Paul Martin.
Targetting citizens for revenge
The fourth part of the council resolution targets citizens for revenge. It reads: " That the City commence a Court Action against all identifiable individuals who, during the summer of 2004, participated in activities in contravention of the City's Injunction Order, seeking to have them held in contempt of Court."
This is a very serious assault on the targetted individuals - and there may be several hundred. Contempt charges frequently result in jail time and/or very heavy fines. Note that the reference to "the summer of 2004". The injunction came into force on September 11, 2003 . Canon Paddy Doran and hundreds who marched with him openly violated the injunction in the fall of 2003. But the city doesn't want to be seen persecuting an Anglican prelate. It would prefer to pick on the largely defenceless young people who courageously and peacefully occupied trees near the construction zone. And there can be no doubt that the hit list has already been drawn up. Even if no one is convicted, those charged will face thousands of dollars in legal fees, and months of uncertainty. Being repeatedly dragged into court is a good way to lose one's job. Councillors who support this cowardly resolution should never be forgiven.
Unfortunately, we already know that some in authority are more than willing to impose severe penalties on Red Hill targets. Nineteen-year-old Jonathan Ames was imprisoned without trial and refused bail for six weeks in August and September, even though it was clear within two days of his arrest that he was not guilty of the alleged charges.
A blank cheque to the lawyers
The fifth section of the resolution authorizes "the ongoing retainer of Gowlings, with all legal fees and disbursements to be reviewed and approved by the City Solicitor". This clearly hands these lawyers a blank cheque, with NO OVERSIGHT by city council. It also reveals that this has been the arrangement with Gowlings for some time in the past. We have recently learned that they have billed the city for over $1 million since the end of the federal court case. Meanwhile, the city employs 13 of its own lawyers who apparently aren't capable of persecuting kids, and/or don't have the political connections to sue the federal government.
The sixth section of the resolution confirms what is obvious in the fifth. It instructs the city solicitor to give council a report, once a year and AFTER THE FACT, about how much money Gowlings has extracted from the taxpayers in the previous year. There is no instruction to make this public.
Announcing more attacks
The seventh section is also very revealing. It reads in whole: "That the staff power point presentation be presented to Council while In Camera, at its next meeting and an amended hard copy version of the presentation be released to the public." This exposes how the whole dirty process works. First of all, it's all done in secret (in camera); secondly those who are filling their pockets get the sole right to address councillors on what they should do, provide all the 'information' on which they are to make their decision, and don't have any worries of being contradicted because everything is in secret; and thirdly, a propaganda piece supporting their vindictive campaign is to be used to convince the public that the opponents of the expressway are criminal and deserve to be very harshly punished.
In today's Spectator, Mayor Di Ianni complains about a lawsuit against the city and says "we spend far too much money on litigation and lawyers", but when the shoe is on the other foot, he leads the charge. In the same story we read: "There is a vicious circle aspect to legal bills, say Hamilton councillors: As more money is spent, positions become more entrenched and each side spends more money, hoping they'll win and recover costs." But this is exactly the plan on Red Hill.
Legal costs are just a small part of the equation. A city that decides to punish citizens for peacefully disagreeing with the political elite is clearly a city actively engaged in self-mutilation. In Hamilton the political elite seems to view all opposition as a life and death threat to their control. We will all pay dearly if council continues along this extremely divisive path.
Attend the council meeting
It would be helpful for people to attend the city council meeting on Wednesday evening, even though the discussion about these proposals will occur 'in camera'. Any vote must be held in public. If you can attend, keep in mind that the pro-expressway gang will be looking for any excuse to make accusations against opponents of the expressway. The meeting begins at 7 pm.
Walkathon to pay legal costs
A walk-a-thon is being held on Saturday morning to raise funds for the young people who have been charged in the valley fight and have had to retain lawyers. The meeting time is 10 am at 175 Young Street (Corktown Tavern). The walk is approximately 5 miles in length and follows the trail that leads to Mohawk sports park. Participants can choose to walk as little or as long as they like. At this point, you can contact redhill@hwcn.org for more information.
|
