Supreme Court of Canada – Warrantless Entry of Cell Phones by Elizabeth Marshall

Published January 1, 2015

Elizabeth MarshallOn December 11, 2014, it was reported, on the various news channels, that the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) has enabled police to engage in warrantless entry of cell phones. How can we say that Canada is the “true North strong and free,” when the highest court in the land keeps removing Canadian’s rights? This is becoming a systemic issue, and even our politicians are supportive of this initiative.
Peter MacKay, the Attorney General for Canada, came out and stated that police need more powers to investigate. My question for Mr. MacKay is, if the person has been arrested, is there the chance that a) the police would be unable to obtain a warrant, b) the person charged is going somewhere, and c) is he prepared to have his cell phone open to warrantless entry? It would seem government is as much to blame as the police.

This isn’t the first time the Supreme Court of Canada has removed the people’s rights. I am not in any way, shape, or form promoting bigotry and biases’, but to remove a person’s right of free speech because it might hurt someone’s feelings, doesn’t only remove that person’s rights, but all Canadian’s rights to free speech. Hurt feelings or someone’s dignity is not an inviolable, inalienable right, but someone’s freedom of speech is.

Freedom of speech is based on someone telling the truth. If they aren’t telling the truth, they can be sued for libel and/or slander. That is to be the law. The SCC has effectively left the door open to anyone whose feelings have been hurt to sue for little or no reason, at all.

So now the next question is…if you have hurt someone’s feelings and are charged under a provincial Human Rights violation, does this give police the opportunity to search your cell phone, without a warrant? It would seem so. So perhaps we should have Mr. MacKay charged for hurting our feelings, because he is effectively saying that all Canadians should have their rights removed, to satisfy the very small chance that the police may find something on someone’s cell phone which pertains to their case. He is also saying that someone’s freedom of speech, and this also includes religion because it is based on expressing the truth in words, is subservient to someone’s hurt feelings. I know he has hurt Canadian’s feelings, because he has removed their inviolable rights, as he is accusing them of some heinous crime, even though they may or may not have said something, which could be construed as hurting someone’s feelings.

As for the Supreme Court of Canada, do these judges think they are above the law? What about the documents included in our constitution, which the SCC has used time and again to support themselves; their wages, etc.? What about the politicians and how they have used our constitutional documents to support their so-called ability to create legislation?

Our freedom of speech and the requirement of warrants for searches, are not to be limited by Trudeau’s removal of rights, called the Charter. Our freedom of speech and our security from warrantless searches are included in our Common Law rights, which are included in the Preamble of the British North American Act, 1867, which today is part and parcel of the Constitution of Canada. The Preamble includes none other than Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, the Bill of Rights (1688-89), the Nullum Tempus Act, 1769, the Statute of Frauds, the Abolition of the Star Chamber, 1641, etc.

So the next question is: has the Supreme Court of Canada entered into the field which was the cause of the Abolition of the Star Chamber? In my very humble opinion, Yes! The Court of Star Chamber removed the rights of the people and it had to be abolished. It removed the right of property, the right of defence, and it supported warrantless entry, removal of freedom of speech, etc., etc., etc. So our Courts, be those the Divisional courts, the Superior courts of the provinces, and now the Supreme Court of Canada, are involved in violating the foundation of the British Commonwealth, with the violation of the very documents which created them in the first place, Magna Carta, etc.

We, as Canadian’s, need to be expressing to our elected officials, and to these jurists that we aren’t taking this any longer. They need to understand that we, the people, on behalf of them, will protect the inviolable rights of all Canadians. If you have committed a crime, then you pay, but there can never be warrantless entry and our freedom of speech needs to be protected or we have reached a complete and absolute communist state, at the abusive hands of our courts and our elected officials.

4 Responses to “Supreme Court of Canada – Warrantless Entry of Cell Phones by Elizabeth Marshall”

  1. Gerry Jette January 24, 2015

    Since the municipal police are a department of an incorporated city, it would appear that this warrantless entry of cell phones applies to individuals too. Corporations are people under the law having the same standing as I do under the law aren’t they? So what law am I breaking if I hack into somebody’s cell phone? Many people are now using their cell phone as their main home phone so automatically their privacy can be invaded any time by the dogcatcher. I wonder if we can check out Ms Wynne’s private conversations. I wonder if Stephen H. will be late for supper tonight…
    The last time I looked, this is supposed to be a democracy with equality, etc,etc. When rights are taken away, EVERYONE loses.

  2. Steve Ilievski January 24, 2015

    Agenda 21 keeps advancing while Canadians go back and forth to work oblivious to bureaucrats and politicians making laws and regulations affecting our lives. Obscure functionaries produce voluminous rules and regulations unknown to us which we then are expected to live by or die trying to defy, all the while the majority of Canadians are too busy with sports and mindless diversions to even care. Without the numbers, those who are aware and awake to this oppression are easy pickings for the criminals and thieves who masquerade before us with silly robes and wigs to impress us with their self importance. At the moment my only strategy is to fly under the radar as much as I can, and await the eventual collapse of this ponzi scheme.

  3. John Schnurr January 1, 2015

    Thank you Ms. Marshall for this important information.
    You have made it abundantly clear in your writings that we as a people are ignoring our responsibility to protect what is ours!
    This particular point, amplifies the complacency of the Canadian public as a whole.
    If we don’t defend and protect our rights they will and are being taken one at a time.
    The ignorance and stupidity of Canadians as a whole is overwhelming! Until something effects them personally they/we ignore the obvious!
    “The New world order” is here as it was under the guidance of Adolf Hitler! Either we protect our rights wholeheartedly or be assimilated into complete surrender!

  4. Ed Engel January 1, 2015

    Thank you Ms. Marshall. The article clearly expresses the structure of our legal system and the violations of it.

    I feel most of our government leaders, at all levels are more interested getting personal gains, financial and authority, than what is best for the public.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Get all the latest OLA news
delivered monthly right to your inbox!