Toronto, January 20, 1999Canadian Parliamentary ban by Gilbert Parent alarms civil-liberties officials
Tim Naumetz (Southam News)
THE SPEAKER of the House of Commons claims that all parties backed him in banning Ernst Zundel‘s lawyer from the Parliament buildings.
Gilbert Parent, the Speaker of the House of Commons, was wrong to ban the lawyer for Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel from the parliamentary precincts this week, a spokesman for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association said yesterday.
Below: Douglas Christie refuses to leave Parliamentary lobby
Alan Borovoy, the association’s general counsel, said Mr. Parent issued what appears to be an arbitrary edict that ignored basic standards of fairness when he extended a previous ban against Zundel to his lawyer, Douglas Christie.
“Parliament ought to be governed by the standards of fairness and due process that have been the hallmarks of democratic societies,” Mr. Borovoy said, after Mr. Parent’s officials prevented Mr. Christie from entering Parliament.
Last week, Mr. Christie booked an appearance for Tuesday in a news theatre administered by the Parliamentary Press Gallery. The gallery, which has accepted bookings by Mr. Christie and Zundel, says any group or individual may use the room to comment on issues of national importance. Last June, press gallery directors had refused to cancel Zundel’s booking for the news theatre. However, he was subsequently banned from the building outright.
Mr. Christie said he wanted to use the gallery to issue a statement about Zundel’s hate-literature case before a Canadian Human Rights tribunal in Toronto, and about laws against the promotion of hatred.
Mr. Parent’s press secretary, Heather Bradley, said the Speaker extended the ban to include Mr. Christie after House leaders for all five parties in the Commons agreed to support the action.
While the Commons approved the ban against Zundel by adopting a motion from Don Boudria, the government House leader, there was no record of Mr. Parent’s ruling on Mr. Christie, or any written reasons for the decision.
A senior Commons official verbally informed the press gallery that Mr. Christie would not be allowed into the building, while Ms. Bradley, accompanied [by] Commons security guards, informed Mr. Christie of the development when he arrived on Parliament Hill for his news conference.
Hansard, the official record of Commons debate, contains a brief record of the motion against Zundel, but the reference does not include any reason for the decision.
“As far as I know, there are no criteria governing access to Parliament for these purposes,” said Mr. Borovoy. “There is a great risk of being arbitrary, and Parliament should be governed by standards of fair play and due process. Those are the norms of democratic governments.”
Mr. Boudria said he agreed to ban Mr. Christie because he is acting for Zundel, even though he did not know what the lawyer planned to say at his news conference.
“It would have been somewhat incongruous to say Mr. Zundel can’t enter the House of Commons to give a press conference, but he can pay someone else to do the same thing,” said Mr. Boudria. “In terms of what the content of his speech was, I have no idea.”
Mr. Boudria added no citizen has an automatic right to enter the parliamentary buildings, and Commons security has “a list as long as my arm” of people who have been prohibited from entering the premises, generally for security reasons. He said the public, in effect, seeks permission, even for tours, by going through a security screening station.
Heather Bradley said Zundel and Mr. Christie could have used the media theatre in the National Press Building across the street from Parliament Hill, but did not. |