MUNICIPAL ELECTION ACT CHARGES LAID AGAINST COUNCILLOR SCOTT HAHN

Private charges were laid yesterday at the Superior Courthouse in Kitchener with Justice of the Peace Z. Radulovic. Ms. Radulovic has been one of three different Justices who have examined Informations regarding the Municipal Elections Act (MEA) since last September in relation to two Woolwich Council members. The three J.P.s are Justice Radulovic, Justice Marquette and Justice Phillips.

There are four charges under the MEA covering Sections 89, 78,92 and 94. These charges cover seven to eight contraventions of the Act all of which were explained in depth in the August 11, 2015 Forensic Audit produced by Froese Forensic Partners. Mr. Hahn's contraventions were neither minor, inadvertent nor insignificant and in my opinion the thirteen page Audit plus six pages of Exhibits clearly demonstrated that.

Personally to date I have been appalled at how ridiculous, onerous, disrespectful and amateurish the entire judicial process has been since last September. This would include multiple court appearances and adjournements over six months while the local Crown Prosecuter had complete carriage of the file and then sat on apparently improperly laid charges the entire time. Not until the out of town prosecuter Fraser Kelly announced in court that the charges would not proceed was I aware that the J.P.s involved had somehow laid the charges incorrectly. It has become very clear to me that the so called "right" for citizens to lay private charges under the MEA (at least) is a joke and a paper tiger. Let's see exactly how far and how long these charges against Mr. Hahn proceed.

This private laying of charges while clearly permitted and stated in the MEA is I believe used primarily as a last resort. They can however be laid at any time although the Act lays out a process using a Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) normally followed by a professional Forensic Audit when potential or likely contraventions are found. It normally is not the committee's place to determine whether a candidate is in contravention of the law. Those determinations are made by the Forensic Auditors. They did so and clearly indicated multiple contraventions of the law. Despite that MECAC took it upon themselves not to exercise their authority and send Mr. Hahn's case on to a Prosecuter.

That there is a bias by the Crown in favour of prosecuting charges sent to them by police, municipal councils, MECAC committees and other "authorities" has become very clear to me. That the local Crown would sit on improperly laid charges by a Justice of the Peace and say nothing to me for six months I find appalling. At any point in time I could have relaid the Information and gone back to the J.P. if I had known. My next question is did he advise the charged Councillor or her lawyer during this time? Did she know that the charges would not proceed, even the four that Fraser Kelly admitted in Provincial Court this past spring were laid properly? Exactly what kind of scheme is going on here and will it occur again with the Scott Hahn charges? Has it ocurred already with his charges?

Our courts are not designed and run for the benefit of citizens and taxpayers. They are intentionally designed to be of benefit to lawyers, judges, administrators and bureaucrats all making their living off of the taxpayers' dime. Something similar to career politicians in my opinion. While Mr. Hahn needs to be honestly held accountable by a fair process of law so too does our judicial system. They are intentionally citizen unfriendly and disrespectful and their gamesmanship, their unduly complicated processes, rules and regulations and their biases against those paying the costs of their bloated and overpaid system need to be addressed and not by those most personally benefiting by them.

One last comment here. Prosecuter Fraser Kelly claimed in Provincial Court this past spring that it was not in the public's interest to proceed with the remaining properly laid four charges against Mayor Shantz. Zero explanation followed to back up that statement. Let me ask this question. Are not all our laws passed by duly elected legislatures not in the public interest in the first place? Why pass a law if it isn't supposed to help or protect our citizens and democracy? Therefore if a citizen has apparently broken a law that was passed to protect the public's interests how is it that that citizen should not be prosecuted? At the very least both local and out of town Prosecuters have the duty and obligation to explain that clearly to the public paying their salaries.