[Proculation]

Former Quebec lieutenant governor to claim immunity to avoid fraud trial

$1:

QUEBEC — The queen’s former representative in Quebec, who is invoking sovereign privilege to avoid going to trial on fraud charges, will have her rare legal argument heard this summer.

The lawyer for Lise Thibault, Quebec’s former lieutenant-governor, will argue that his client benefits from a sovereign immunity that should stop the Crown’s criminal case against her from going further.

Marc Labelle says his argument will centre on a little-used common-law statute that states “the queen can do no wrong” — in other words, the crown prosecution cannot prosecute the Crown.

Thibault has pleaded not guilty to two counts each of breach of trust, fraud and creating false or counterfeit documents. This year, a judge ordered her to stand trial.

Labelle says the expenses were incurred during Thibault time as Queen Elizabeth’s representative and should be subject to sovereign immunity.

Thibault was not present as her lawyer appeared briefly before Quebec Superior Court Justice Richard Grenier on Friday and told reporters afterward he’ll spend the next two months doing more research.

Labelle says he hasn’t found any Canadian precedent where a representative of the queen invoked this privilege for criminal charges.

The motion is to be heard in Superior Court on Aug. 23.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/lie ... story.html

The lawyer is invoking the Interpretation Act, section 17:

$1:

Her Majesty not bound or affected unless stated

17. No enactment is binding on Her Majesty or affects Her Majesty or Her Majesty’s rights or prerogatives in any manner, except as mentioned or referred to in the enactment.

R.S., c. I-23, s. 16.

The Monarchist League of Canada said that there's no precedent for a representative of the Crown to be persecuted by itself and that this case should be investigated thoroughly.

What do you think ?

[PluggyRug]

You need to talk to Oliver Cromwell

[Proculation]

That would be a precedent

But still, a lawyer pleading royal immunity in our times. That's interesting.

[Thanos]

Sounds fairly dangerous. Hopefully the court tosses this silly defense based on the sheer ridiculousness of it all.

[Proculation]

bump

I really need opinions from monarchists from english canada.

[ccga3359]

As English born and a monarchist I say the hell with her. She is not the queen, only her representative, an employee. Just like Adrienne Clarkson was not the head of state when she was governer general as she claimed the Honourable Lise Thibault cannot hold powers that only the queen has. Not very "honourable" either. Let her face the same laws as all royal subjects.

[Cfox]

I seriously agree. She was only a representative, not the queen herself. Any criminal activities she committed, she must be held accountable. No-one other than Her Majesty, The Queen, has protections under the Interpretation Act, section 17:

Quote:
Her Majesty not bound or affected unless stated

17. No enactment is binding on Her Majesty or affects Her Majesty or Her Majesty’s rights or prerogatives in any manner, except as mentioned or referred to in the enactment.

R.S., c. I-23, s. 16.

While in-service, I swore allegiance to the Queen, not her stand-ins.

[andyt]

So you monarchists would agree that if the Queen commits a crime she should not be charged?

[Cfox]

As compared to the government who do not get charged for crimes?

[andyt]

Cfox Cfox:

As compared to the government who do not get charged for crimes?

If Harper commits fraud, he would be charged, no? If Harper ordered others to commit fraud, he would be charged, no? Exactly what crimes does the government not get charged for?

[Cfox]

These acts you speak of are in his jurisdiction and home country. So I fail to see your connection to my statement.

[andyt]

I think you're going to have to spell it out for me then.

[Cfox]

It is our government that regulates our jurisdiction in Canada, and as the Queen is NOT a citizen of Canada, she cannot be charged with a crime here. She has the same diplomatic immunity we afford to other dignitaries while here. Her representatives, on the other hand, ARE Canadian citizens and therefore are NOT immune to our laws. And just to be blunt Harper IS a Canadian citizen and subject to our laws.

[andyt]

OK, but that's not the argument that's being advanced. And it doesn't explain your comment about governments that don't get charged for crimes.

[Proculation]

The GG/LGs are not the government. They are the heads of state. The prime minister/premiers and their cabinet are the governments of the Queen. Like Cfox said, they are accountable. That's what the patriots fought for in 1837-38: a responsible government elected by the people.

However, what would have happened to a GG when they were Lords from UK ? I guess it would be immunity.