Writ of Mandamus

The following, known as a Writ of Mandamus, has been filed with a Federal Court by a member of CAPP:

NOTICE OF APPLICATION

TO THE RESPONDENT: The Attorney General of Canada

A PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED by the applicant. The relief claimed by the applicant appears on the following page…. See More

THIS APPLICATION will be heard by the Court at a time and place to be fixed by the Judicial Administrator. Unless the Court orders otherwise, the place of hearing will be as requested by the applicant. The applicant requests that this application be heard at (place where Federal Court of Appeal (or Federal Court) ordinarily sits).

IF YOU WISH TO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION, to receive notice of any step in the application or to be served with any documents in the application, you or a solicitor acting for you must prepare a notice of appearance in Form 305 prescribed by the Federal Courts Rules and serve it on the applicant’s solicitor, or where the applicant is self-represented, on the applicant, WITHIN 10 DAYS after being served with this notice of application.

Copies of the Federal Courts Rules information concerning the local offices of the Court and other necessary information may be obtained on request to the Administrator of this Court at Ottawa (telephone 613-992-4238) or at any local office.

IF YOU FAIL TO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION, JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU.

(March 15th 2010)

Issued by:_____________________________________
(Registry Officer)

Address of local office:__180 Queen Street, Toronto, Ontario, 2nd Floor________________

TO: The Attorney General of Canada

The Honourable Robert Douglas Nicholson
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
284 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1A 0H8

Service will be on Justice Canada Toronto, Ontario

APPLICATION

This is an application for a writ of mandamus pursuant to the Liberal Party motion passed in the Canadian House of Commons on Thursday December 10th, 2009 regarding the handing over of documents in the possession of the government, relating to the Afghanistan detainee issue. Given that parliament is supreme under our Canadian constitution, the government and this PM has to without delay, had over all the documents as requested in the motion order, in full, uncensored, unedited, unredacted. The government remains as of this filing, in contempt and in violation of the Canadian Constitution in failing to obey the motion. I ask the court to take jurisdiction of this matter.

This matter pertains to an order issued in the House of Commons by parliament and ignored and not complied with by the Prime Minister and members of his government. This obstruction and failure to comply with an explicit order from parliament which is the supreme body, continues of today, March 15th, 2010, at the filing of this motion.

The date of the motion order originating from parliament of Canada was December 10th, 2009. 40th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION
EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 128
CONTENTS
Thursday, December 10, 2009

The parliament motion (which forms the basis for this filing) tabled by the hon. member for Vancouver South stated:

‘That, given the undisputed privileges of Parliament under Canada’s constitution, including the absolute power to require the government to produce uncensored documents when requested, and given the reality that the government has violated the rights of Parliament by invoking the Canada Evidence Act to censor documents before producing them, the House urgently requires access to the following documents in their original and uncensored form:

all documents referred to in the affidavit of Richard Colvin, dated October 5, 2009;

all documents within the Department of Foreign Affairs written in response to the documents referred to in the affidavit of Richard Colvin, dated October 5, 2009;

all memoranda for information or memoranda for decision sent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs concerning detainees from December 18, 2005 to the present;

all documents produced pursuant to all orders of the Federal Court in Amnesty International Canada and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association v. Chief of the Defence Staff for the Canadian Forces, Minister of National Defence and Attorney General of Canada

all documents produced to the Military Police Complaints Commission in the Afghanistan Public Interest Hearings;

all annual human rights reports by the Department of Foreign Affairs on Afghanistan; and
accordingly the House hereby orders that these documents be produced in their original and uncensored form forthwith.

The applicant Paul Alexander makes application for and the relief sought (as I make my case to re-establish power back into the hands of parliament (usurped by the Prime Minister) and power back into the hands of the people of Canada (usurped by the parliament in their failure to charge the government in contempt of parliament which is in derelict to their duty to the people of Canada):
1.) a writ of mandamus ordered by the court on the parliament to file (conduct the necessary parliamentary actions as under our constitution) the charge/motion of contempt of parliament on the sitting Prime Minister, Mr. Mackay (Defense), Mr. Nicholson (Justice) and any civil servants, bureaucrats, political masters, and MPs who are complicit in the obstruction in complying with the motion issued by parliament. This obstruction is unacceptable and in violation of our laws and constitution, and we plead on the court to compel the parliament under the constitution, to file the charge of contempt of parliament on the sitting Prime Minister. We are throwing ourselves at the mercy of the court, as self represented applicants, to compel the parliament of Canada to immediately and without delay, perform their purely member of parliament duties properly as mandated under our constitution when there is a contempt of a parliamentary order. The court must ensure that the government complies with the house’s standing order to produce unredacted, unedited, untouched documents about the handling of Afghan detainees. This charging of contempt of parliament is based on this PM and government being in contempt of a parliamentary motion.
2.) The applicant also asks the court to order the parliament and sergeant at arms/police in the commons, whether the parliament themselves or the sergeant at arms or police, to immediately seize the documents that are the subject of the above described motion that was passed on December 10th 2009. The applicant asks the court to order that the documents be seized immediately and handed to parliament in full and parliament is to declare that the documents have been received in full for this matter to be complete. Under the constitution, parliament has the right and duty to instruct the police/sergeant at arms to seize the materials in question. This is in addition relief number 1.)
3.) The applicant further asks the court to instruct the parliament and sergeant at arms/police that any obstruction by the government, or any sitting MP, on either side of the political divide, regardless of party, be met with arrest.
4.) The applicant asks that if the court orders finds for the writ of mandamus and the parliament fails to immediately and timely file the contempt charge, that the parliament be subjected to charge by the court as the parliament is and will be in violation of its constitutional duty.
The applicant is self-represented. The applicant remains unclear as to which arm of the court his be filed yet is in strong belief it is in the Federal Court and thus subjected to the Federal Court rules and procedures. I am asking the court to consider if this matter cannot be enforced by the Federal court under rules, then please consider rule 57 to be applied by this Court to permit the conversion of this matter to one of Judicial Review. I leave this to the court to decide and throw myself to the mercy of the court. I am a self-represented litigant and I admit there may be defects as to form