Democracy Watch will pursue a court challenge of the request by Prime Minister Trudeau that the Governor General prorogue Parliament.Trudeau announced the prorogation at a press conference the morning of January 6, shortly after Democracy Watch announced it would oppose in court any prorogation if it met certain criteria.On Wednesday morning, Democracy Watch said it would follow through on its court threat, having decided this prorogation is clearly in the Liberal Party’s self-interest, and is happening at a time when the opposition parties are clearly intending to vote non-confidence in the government.Democracy Watch’s legal arguments will be based on rulings in its past court cases challenging snap election calls, and the UK Supreme Court’s unanimous 2019 ruling that it was illegal for then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson to prorogue Parliament for no justifiable reason when a majority of MPs wanted Parliament to stay open and operating..Democracy watchdog ponders legal challenge to prorogation, insists anti-corruption bills must pass.“While a non-confidence motion was not being debated when the prorogation was requested, and while it is fair to allow a political party to change leaders before an election occurs, the Prime Minister dictating that Parliament must shut down for almost three months to avoid a non-confidence vote in his government that would trigger an election, without consulting any opposition leaders or even Liberal MPs, is fundamentally undemocratic and unjustifiable,” said Duff Conacher, Co-founder of Democracy Watch. “The Prime Minister had other options and, from all evidence, could have reached an agreement some time ago with one or more opposition parties to have the Liberals hold a party leadership contest while Parliament continued operating," Conacher insisted.The decision comes one day after the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announced it would argue a similar case on behalf of Canadians David MacKinnon and Aris Lavranos. Conacher wants the courts to against the Liberal manoeuvre and set a lasting precedent..Justice Centre aids legal challenge to stop parliamentary prorogation.“Hopefully the courts will take this opportunity to restrict this kind of abuse of power from happening in the future by issuing a ruling that makes it clear what is a legal, justifiable prorogation and what amounts to an illegal prorogation,” said Conacher. “All federal parties should also work together to set out clear rules that restrict prorogations, snap elections, and other powers of the Prime Minister, like the rules enacted years ago by all parties in Britain, Australia and New Zealand.”Democracy Watch also called on all parties to set aside their partisan self-interest after the prorogation period, and before a federal election happens, and act in the public interest by working together to pass the long-delayed bill that strengthens federal whistleblower protection in key ways, and by enacting bills after the Hogue Inquiry reports to close all the huge loopholes that allow for secret, undemocratic and unethical spending, fundraising, donations, loans, lobbying and disinformation campaigns by foreign “proxies” and to strengthen enforcement and penalties. “The federal parties all worked together to enact Bill C-70 in five weeks last spring, and there is no good reason why, before the next election happens, they can’t work together to pass bills to strengthen whistleblower protection and close all the loopholes that allow for secret, unethical and undemocratic foreign interference in Canadian politics,” said Conacher.“Every voter should seriously consider not voting for any party that prevents these bills from passing before a federal election happens,” said Conacher.
