U of O Watch mission, in the words of Foucault...

"One knows … that the university and in a general way, all teaching systems, which appear simply to disseminate knowledge, are made to maintain a certain social class in power; and to exclude the instruments of power of another social class. … It seems to me that the real political task in a society such as ours is to criticise the workings of institutions, which appear to be both neutral and independent; to criticise and attack them in such a manner that the political violence which has always exercised itself obscurely through them will be unmasked, so that one can fight against them." -- Foucault, debating Chomsky, 1971.

U of O Watch mission, in the words of Socrates...

"An education obtained with money is worse than no education at all." -- Socrates

video of president allan rock at work

Friday, July 27, 2012

“Ambush” caused judge to withdraw from civil suit, lawyers say -- media article, St. Lewis v. Rancourt

The next day, The Ottawa Citizen updated their article to this (and added a picture):


Interested Observer said...

Will you post the letter to the Justice Hackland referred to in the article?

Anonymous said...

Odd headline! Seems to me that Prof Rancourt raised a reasonable concern. Judges are surely obligated to carefully avoid any apprehension of bias. This judge has recently donated money to the Universty of Ottawa --- the self same party who is funding the case against Rancourt that judge is adjudicating. Adding to an apprehension of potential bias --- the law firm that represents U of O has a special place in the heart of the judge.

While the circumstances linked to the donation and to the emotional link with the law firm warrant the utmost sympathy --- the loss of a son ---- that does not change a conclusion that the aforementioned raise concerns over an apprehension (what I understand.to be a perception of possible bias, which is different from asserting that the circumstances have biased the judge) of bias.

In my view the judge should not have agreed to hear the case, given the reasonable apprehension of bias. At the very least he should have disclosed the obvious potential for bias. He did not. Instead the judge takes great umbrage with the cheek of a citizen raising such a concern. Huffy perhaps that someone outside of the old boys network would dare to have their own view? It seems the Ottawa Citizen is similarly offended! Wow!