justice

Thursday July 6, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday July 6, 2017

‘Odious’ or overdue: Reports of Omar Khadr settlement draw sharply different reactions

A case that has divided Canadians for nearly 15 years continued to do so Tuesday as news leaked that Ottawa would apologize to Omar Khadr and offer a settlement of more than $10 million for the abuse he endured while in U.S. custody in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.

The vitriol was most intense among fringe commentators on the far right and left, but the issue quickly drew political reactions from across the spectrum, with former members of the Harper administration taking to Twitter and other social media to weigh in.

“Odious,” wrote former Conservative defence minister Jason Kenney, now leader of Alberta’s Progressive Conservative party, on Twitter. “Confessed terrorist who assembled & planted the same kind of IED (improvised explosive device) that killed 97 Canadians to be given $10-million.”

Others praised the government apology as long overdue. “Finally we have seen the light!” wrote Shelly Whitman, executive director of the Roméo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative.

While Khadr’s case has always elicited a vigorous debate, news of the settlement triggered extreme commentary Tuesday, including calls on social media for Khadr’s murder and the deaths of the journalists reporting the story, or of advocates who support a government apology. (Continued: Toronto Star) 

 

Friday June 9, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday June 9, 2017

James Comey says it’s ‘not up to him’ to decide if Trump’s ‘disturbing behaviour’ was obstruction of justice

Former FBI Director James Comey said it was not up to him to determine whether Donald Trump behaviour was obstruction of justice.

April 21, 2017

“I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct,” Mr Comey said during his testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, but added that Mr Trump’s behaviour was “concerning…and disturbing”.

Mr Comey, fired on 9 May, detailed in a written statement ahead of his ongoing testimony that Mr Trump said to him during a one-on-one White House dinner: “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.”

The former FBI Director said his “common sense” said that it made him feel as if Mr Trump was “looking for something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job” of FBI Director.

June 24, 2016

Mr Comey, a prosecutor himself, said that the determination of obstruction of justice should be left up to the Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller, who was appointed as an independent counsel in the investigation into the alleged ties between Mr Trump’s campaign team and Russia and the country’s possible interference with the 2016 US election.

The former Director’s comment today, however, may mean that Mr Trump’s possible obstruction of justice or possible collusion with Russian officials is also under the purview of Mr Mueller’s investigation.

Obstruction of justice is an impeachable offence but is a tricky legal issue because it has to do with Mr Trump’s actions rather than his intent or how Mr Trump’s actions made Mr Comey feel.  As a lawyer, Mr Comey is aware of this and likely why he is leaving that determination up to Mr Mueller. (Source: The Independent)

 

SaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSave

Friday June 9, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday June 9, 2017

James Comey says it’s ‘not up to him’ to decide if Trump’s ‘disturbing behaviour’ was obstruction of justice

Former FBI Director James Comey said it was not up to him to determine whether Donald Trump behaviour was obstruction of justice.

May 11, 2017

“I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct,” Mr Comey said during his testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, but added that Mr Trump’s behaviour was “concerning…and disturbing”.

Mr Comey, fired on 9 May, detailed in a written statement ahead of his ongoing testimony that Mr Trump said to him during a one-on-one White House dinner: “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.”

The former FBI Director said his “common sense” said that it made him feel as if Mr Trump was “looking for something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job” of FBI Director.

December 17, 2016

Mr Comey, a prosecutor himself, said that the determination of obstruction of justice should be left up to the Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller, who was appointed as an independent counsel in the investigation into the alleged ties between Mr Trump’s campaign team and Russia and the country’s possible interference with the 2016 US election.

The former Director’s comment today, however, may mean that Mr Trump’s possible obstruction of justice or possible collusion with Russian officials is also under the purview of Mr Mueller’s investigation.

Obstruction of justice is an impeachable offence but is a tricky legal issue because it has to do with Mr Trump’s actions rather than his intent or how Mr Trump’s actions made Mr Comey feel.  As a lawyer, Mr Comey is aware of this and likely why he is leaving that determination up to Mr Mueller. (Source: The Independent)

 

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

Friday March 31, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday March 31, 2017

US President Donald Trump keeps getting tripped by checks & balances

Will Donald Trump transform the US in his first 100 days through executive orders and new laws? Will he wreak protectionist, anti-immigrant and anti-minority havoc? Relax. The US Constitution is designed to hobble presidents. It divides power between the president, US Congress and the judiciary, giving no branch an overriding authority. Each is subject to checks and balances.

Neither legislators not judges feel inferior to or obliged to kowtow to the president. He has to negotiate with even minor Congressmen for legislative support. If instead he tries to bludgeon his way forward, he suffers humiliating setbacks. Trump has proved that repeatedly. Again and again he has charged forward with high-volume rhetoric and been tripped up. With every trip, he looks less fearsome, and sometimes comical.

His latest humiliation has been the forced postponement of his Bill repealing Obama’s healthcare scheme, something central to his platform. His own Republican Party’s right wing refused to go along, saying Trump’s changes were not radical enough. Trump says Obamacare will implode anyway. But the world now knows that the Republican majority in Congress has a mind of its own — as was true of Democratic majorities when Democratic presidents were in power. Trump will have to wheedle and cajole, not bludgeon. He may have to dilute or abandon many proposals. (Source: Times of India) 

 

Tuesday August 23, 2016

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator Ð Tuesday August 23, 2016 Police chiefs want new law that would compel people to reveal passwords Canada's police chiefs want a new law that would force people to hand over their electronic passwords with a judge's consent. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police has passed a resolution calling for the legal measure to unlock digital evidence, saying criminals increasingly use encryption to hide illicit activities. There is nothing currently in Canadian law that would compel someone to provide a password to police during an investigation, RCMP Assistant Commissioner Joe Oliver told a news conference Tuesday. Oliver said criminals Ñ from child abusers to mobsters Ñ are operating online in almost complete anonymity with the help of tools that mask identities and messages, a phenomenon police call "going dark." "The victims in the digital space are real," Oliver said. "Canada's law and policing capabilities must keep pace with the evolution of technology." The chiefs' proposed password scheme is "wildly disproportionate," because in the case of a laptop computer it would mean handing over the "key to your whole personal life," said David Christopher, a spokesman for OpenMedia, a group that works to keep the Internet surveillance-free. "On the face of it, this seems like it's clearly unconstitutional." The police chiefs' resolution comes as the federal government begins a consultation on cybersecurity that will look at issues including the best way to balance online freedoms with the needs of police. The consultation runs until Oct. 15. (Source: CBC) http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/passwords-rcmp-compel-iphone-1.3723325 Canada, police, computer, passwords, privacy, justice, crime, investigation

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday August 23, 2016

Police chiefs want new law that would compel people to reveal passwords

Canada’s police chiefs want a new law that would force people to hand over their electronic passwords with a judge’s consent.

The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police has passed a resolution calling for the legal measure to unlock digital evidence, saying criminals increasingly use encryption to hide illicit activities.

There is nothing currently in Canadian law that would compel someone to provide a password to police during an investigation, RCMP Assistant Commissioner Joe Oliver told a news conference Tuesday.

Oliver said criminals — from child abusers to mobsters — are operating online in almost complete anonymity with the help of tools that mask identities and messages, a phenomenon police call “going dark.”

“The victims in the digital space are real,” Oliver said. “Canada’s law and policing capabilities must keep pace with the evolution of technology.”

The chiefs’ proposed password scheme is “wildly disproportionate,” because in the case of a laptop computer it would mean handing over the “key to your whole personal life,” said David Christopher, a spokesman for OpenMedia, a group that works to keep the Internet surveillance-free.

“On the face of it, this seems like it’s clearly unconstitutional.”

The police chiefs’ resolution comes as the federal government begins a consultation on cybersecurity that will look at issues including the best way to balance online freedoms with the needs of police. The consultation runs until Oct. 15. (Source: CBC)