XPost: can.politics, ont.politics, bc.politics   
   XPost: ab.politics   
   From: {~_~}@nyet.ca   
      
   Rocco Galati   
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia   
      
   Rocco Galati is a Canadian lawyer who specializes in terrorism cases.   
      
   In 2001, he defended Delmart Vreeland at trial.   
      
   He was Abdurahman Khadr's first lawyer.  Shortly after Khadr's first   
   press conference Galati resigned from all his terrorism-related cases,   
   after publishing a threat left on his answering machine which stated:   
   "Well, Mr. Galati. What's this I hear about you working with the   
   terrorist now, helping to get that (expletive) punk terrorist Khadr off.   
   You a dead wop."  Galati requested 24-hour surveillance of his house;   
   when the RCMP refused to provide this, he declared that "we now live in   
   Colombia because the rule of law is meaningless" and later indicated he   
   believed the call came from American intelligence. Mr Galati went on to   
   claim: "The voice is similar and likely the same as a voice of someone   
   who threatened one of our former clients," he said, adding later that   
   "in that case, our client disappeared."   
      
   In 2006, he represented Ahmad Mustafa Ghany, a suspect in the 2006   
   Toronto terrorism case. On June 12 he alleged that the treatment of the   
   prisoners and the handling of the case made it impossible for the   
   accused to obtain a fair trial.   
      
   Mr. Galati is currently pursuing a case against the Canadian government   
   to restore the original intended use of the Bank of Canada as a lender   
   to the government.   
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   
      
   Galati has challenged the appointment of Justice Marc Nadon to the   
   Supreme Court of Canada, and the case, docket #35586, will be heard in   
   January 2014.   
   Galati maintains, inter alia, that government advisor Ian Binnie, a   
   retired Puisne Justice, reviewed Sections 5 and 6 of the Supreme Court   
   Act but neglected Section 30, which deals with ensuring the court has   
   quorum of at least five judges.   
   ________________________________________________________   
   24 Hours Vancouver, CP — Mar 21 2014   
      
      
   Lawyer questions Harper’s ‘subversive mess’   
      
      
   OTTAWA - Constitutional lawyer Rocco Galati was in the middle of a   
   month-long sojourn on the Indian subcontinent when word reached him   
   Friday that he'd brought down a Supreme Court appointee and rattled the   
   legal underpinnings of the Conservative government.   
      
   But the man who first challenged Prime Minister Stephen Harper's choice   
   of Justice Marc Nadon for the top bench was not in a celebratory mood   
   after playing David to a constitutional Goliath.   
      
   "When I started this I was very, very clear and convinced that I was   
   right and that this was as clear as a bell to me," Galati told The   
   Canadian Press in a telephone interview from Karachi, Pakistan.   
      
   In an unprecedented reference, the top court agreed by a 6-1 margin that   
   Nadon was not eligible to sit amongst them and that the government could   
   not unilaterally rewrite the Supreme Court Act rules on the composition   
   of the bench.   
      
   "I just regret the fact the government can make a subversive mess of our   
   Constitution and it's got to be private citizens like me — at my own   
   expense, this has cost me a lot of money, my own time, energy and money;   
   I'm not getting any of that back — to clean up what?" said Galati.   
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   
      
   "To clean up the mess of the subversive government that doesn't want to   
   respect the Constitution. Why should a private citizen have to do that,   
   quite frankly?   
      
   "If I hadn't brought the challenge, Justice Nadon would be deciding   
   cases as we speak."   
      
   The reference ruling came a day after the top court had struck down   
   retroactive Conservative changes to parole eligibility, ruling them a   
   clear breach of the Charter and pointedly noting "that enactment of   
   Charter-infringing legislation does great damage to that confidence" in   
   the justice system.   
      
   The back-to-back rulings by a court that now has a majority of Harper   
   appointees reinforces a growing impression in legal circles that the   
   Conservative government is playing fast and loose with the law.   
      
   Some, such as Justice Department whistle-blower Edgar Schmidt, are   
   openly questioning who in government is minding the constitutional store.   
      
   "If the attorney general, the prime minister, Governor General and the   
   chief justice of the Supreme Court aren't, it's pretty pathetic that   
   they rely on citizens," Galati said.   
      
   It's hardly the first time the Toronto lawyer, who specializes in   
   constitutional and immigration law, has stepped up to kick the court   
   system in the shins.   
      
   In 2011, the Federal Court of Appeal ruled that the Federal Court was in   
   breach of the law after Galati questioned why retired judges over 75   
   were being retained as deputy judges, despite mandatory retirement   
   language in the Federal Courts Act.   
      
   Thirteen deputy judges had to be let go.   
      
   "People said to me in that case, 'They've been doing it for 60 years,   
   how can it be wrong?'"  Galati related in an interview last November.   
      
   "I said, 'Nobody's challenged it.'"   
      
   Ultimately, private citizens must be prepared to step up and challenge   
   government and the courts, Galati said Friday.   
      
   "It's probably apt, because the Supreme Court in 1951 ruled specifically   
   that the Constitution doesn't belong to either government. It belongs to   
   the citizens and it's there that we find our protection," he said.   
      
   "That's true, it's often the citizens that bring up these challenges.   
   It's just pathetic that the court doesn't recognize that the citizens   
   who are grieved by these constitutional breaches shouldn't have to be   
   the ones to pay to fix the constitutional breaches."   
      
   ================================================================   
   ===============================================   
      
   								One man with courage makes a majority.   ~  Andrew Jackson   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)