Consider the case of Quebec history professor Frédéric Bastien. Eight years ago, he set out to chronicle the politico-diplomatic ballet between Canada and Great Britain that attended the 1982 patriation of the Constitution.
His book titled La bataille de Londres was published earlier this week; its back story is as instructive as its content.
The patriation of the Constitution is a watershed moment in Canada’s history. Three decades after the fact, it is still a source of conflicting interpretations. Bastien’s book will not settle those differences but it is not for lack of trying.
Bastien researched his subject in Great Britain and Canada. In the latter case his efforts mostly resulted in pages upon pages of redacted Privy Council material. But in London he struck gold.
Under Tony Blair’s Labour government, Great Britain modernized its access-to-information system. Most of the book’s fresh historical material is derived from British sources.
That includes a memo appraising the British High Commission in Ottawa of a startling 1981 conversation between Great Britain’s Attorney General Michael Havers and Bora Laskin, who was chief justice of the Supreme Court.
At the time, the Supreme Court was considering the constitutionality of Pierre Trudeau’s bid to patriate the Constitution over the objections of a majority of the provinces.
Laskin is reported to have told the British minister that it would be a while before the judges reached a conclusion as they were divided. He is also said to have shared the same information with Michael Pitfield who was then Canada’s top civil servant. In another conversation with British representatives just two weeks before the ruling was issued, Laskin again shared insights on the Supreme Court’s mindset.
That would make for a serious breach in the firewall that is expected to insulate the Supreme Court from the governments of the day. The inside information that Laskin is reported to have shared with various political interlocutors would put any chief justice on the wrong side of a sacrosanct line.
Based on this and more, Bastien concludes that the patriation of the Constitution has all the makings of a coup d’état. Looking at the many grey areas attending his thesis, some readers could come to a different conclusion.
In the case of the Supreme Court for instance, it ultimately ruled that without substantial provincial support, Trudeau’s bid would lack political legitimacy. That sent him back to the negotiating table.
In Quebec, the book has prompted calls for lifting the official veil that is still keeping salient Canadian details of the file from the public eye. In response, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government has stuck to its mantra that it is not interested in re-enacting the constitutional wars of the past. Its appetite for a war of words is apparently inversely proportional to its inclination to celebrate military battles.
The Supreme Court though is taking matters seriously. It has launched an investigation into Bastien’s findings. The court’s moral legitimacy rests on its reputation for independence. Regardless of the outcome of its 1981 deliberations, the notion that its late chief justice was interacting with politicians on both sides of the Atlantic is a troubling one.
Much is properly made these days of the Conservative obsession for government secrecy. But Harper is really building on a civil service culture that is based on an omertà-style code of honour.
As often as not Canada’s top mandarins take their perspective to the grave, depriving Canadians of the insights that they gained on the public dime and allowing their former political masters to embellish their own role at will. Paper trails, such as they may exist, are routinely buried out of public sight.
Canada’s political elite is prompt to take offence when a page of history such as the country’s role in the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis is reduced to a footnote in a Hollywood blockbuster movie. But does a country that allows its gatekeepers to redact its history deserve any better?
Original Article
Source: thestar.com
Author: Chantal Hébert
No comments:
Post a Comment