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

Monday, June 10, 2013

On-going story of an application to the Supreme Court of Canada

When is it OK in a democratic society for a court to ignore a complaint of bias of the court? Is it acceptable for the rules of the court to permit circumventing a bias complaint? Can a judge refuse to hear and determine a complaint about his/her own apparent bias? Is being heard on a bias question in order to overturn decisions of a judge a Charter right? Will the Supreme Court of Canada find these questions of sufficient importance to hear the appeal?

At least the last of these questions will be answered in the coming months. Here is how the story has unfolded to date:
  • 2013-01-07::: Rancourt's Application for Leave to Appeal filed to the Supreme Court of Canada, to appeal from the November 29, 2012 decision of Justice Peter Annis to not grant an appeal regarding the defendant's complaints about reasonable apprehension of bias. Full-Application-SCC.
  • 2013-02-13::: Motion to a Judge, filed to the Supreme Court of Canada, motion to set aside Registrar's January 25, 2013 order. Full-Motion-SCC.
  • 2013-02-14::: Letter of St. Lewis via Richard Dearden to SCC Registrar, asking that Registrar "not accept" Rancourt's Motion to a Judge. 2013-02-14-Dearden-to-Registrar.
  • 2013-02-22::: Letter of U of O via Peter Doody to SCC Registrar, echoing Dearden's request to "not accept" Rancourt's Motion to a Judge. 2013-02-22-Doody-to-Registrar.
  • 2013-03-04::: Ontario Civil Liberties Association's letter to the Chief Justice of Canada, about SCC Registrar's conduct. LINK. Followed by THIS, and then THIS.
Stuff happens in the corridors at the Supreme Court...?
  • 2013-04-08::: Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada changes his mind, accepts to file Rancourt's Application for leave to appeal: Registrar's letter.
  • 2013-04-09::: Rancourt re-files his Application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada: Full-Application-SCC.
  • 2013-04-11::: Supreme Court of Canada Registry letter to Rancourt -- Materials filed, File Number assigned: Registry's letter
  • 2013-04-19::: Supreme Court of Canada responds to the Ontario Civil Liberties Association about Registrar's conduct: SCC-letter-OCLA.*
  • 2013-05-09::: U of O submissions for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada: UofO-Mem-Arg-SCC.
  • 2013-05-09::: St. Lewis's submissions for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada: StL-Mem-Arg-SCC.
  • 2013-05-21::: Rancourt's REPLY for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada: DGR-Reply-SCC.
*This bullet was added on June 20, 2013.

Sunday, June 9, 2013

Another dubious distinction for U of O: No easy access to information

University of Ottawa again topped list of formal requests for information last year (LINK)
By Neco Cockburn, OTTAWA CITIZEN June 7, 2013

The University's spin is poor:

No mention of how the U of O routinely claims that access to information requests are made in bad faith, only to be ordered or otherwise convinced to comply: PO-3121, PO-2974.

Or of how often the U of O simply disregards the access to information law and must be ordered to produce a response:  PO-3043, PO-2671, PO-2698.

The only case where the University's claim that a request is made in bad faith was upheld is the case mentioned by the spin doctor: PO-3188.