The Justin Bieber reference was used by the Crown to make an important point. The Canadian Constitution requires that Senators meet certain qualifications including that they be at least 30 years old and residents of the province that they are appointed to represent. The witness was recently retired Senate law clerk Mark Audcent (a recognized expert in Canadian constitutional law as it applies to the Senate). Crown attorney Mark Holmes asked Mr. Audcent the following question:
“If the Governor-General, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister, appointed Justin Bieber to the Senate tomorrow, would he become 30?”
Mr. Audcent replied "Of course not". The implication being that someone does not "magically" become a resident of a province just because the Governor-General, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister, appoints that person to the Senate as a representative of said province. Mr. Holmes is obviously building a case for the proposition that Mike Duffy was not qualified to represent PEI as a Senator because his appointment to the Senate as a representative of PEI violated the Canadian Constitution.
The Prime Minister who appointed Mike Duffy would, of course, be none other than the Right Honourable Stephen Harper. Based on the above testimony and other testimony by Mr. Audcent over the past couple of days, Mr. Holmes would seem to be well on his way towards establishing this point.
According to Wikipedia, Stephen Harper made the following solemn oath when he was sworn in as Prime Minister:
"I, (name), do solemnly and sincerely promise and swear (or declare) that I will truly and faithfully, and to the best of my skill and knowledge, execute the powers and trust reposed in me as Prime Minister, so help me God."
I have a feeling that this will not be the last time during this trial that Prime Minister Harper is revealed to have at least arguably if not actually violated his oath of office (pay particular attention to the word "trust" in the above oath).
Sidebar: It is true that people have been appointed to the Senate to represent various far flung provinces even though the Senate appointees have lived for many many years outside of their home provinces. The difference between what happened with Mike Duffy and what happened with Pamela Wallin vs these appointments from the past is that those being considered for appointment to the Senate in the past for provinces that they were no longer residents of were apparently told to move back to their home provinces and live there long enough to establish residency. Once residency had been established, the Prime Minister of the day would advise the Governor-General to appoint them to the Senate. In other words, these other Prime Ministers understood that they were bound by the Constitution - an understanding that Prime Minister Harper apparently does not share with his predecessors.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/crown-invokes-justin-bieber-in-mike-duffy-trial/article23882827/
No comments:
Post a Comment