B.C.'s Supreme Court has ruled that a person charged with contempt of court for breaking an injunction on the Coastal GasLink Pipeline was found not guilty.

B.C. Crown Prosecution Service confirmed with CBC that Justice Michael Tammen read the decision in Smithers, B.C., Wednesday for the trial of Sabina Dennis.

  • m0darn
    7·
    7 months ago

    This is a big deal.

    While trying to understand this news article I came across this article by the BC Civil Liberties Association.

    Which says:

    Q: What are the common defences for a charge of criminal contempt of court?

    A: Common defences include proving the terms of the injunction aren’t sufficiently clear, or the defendant’s conduct wasn’t actually in breach of terms of the order. Some defendants have argued duress or necessity, but these defences have rarely been successful.

    …

    Q: What are the other defences for a charge of criminal contempt of court?

    A: There aren’t many (…) Many of the traditional criminal law defences aren’t available.

    The CBC News article says:

    Mahon said Dennis — a Dakelh woman — was invited to the pipeline blockade by members of the Wet’suwet’en to bear witness to the events, in accordance with Wet’suwet’en traditional law.

    Mahon added that Dennis’s role as a witness for the Wet’suwet’en is essential to the case because she was not there to bring societal disrespect onto the courts, which the Crown would need to prove in charges of criminal contempt.

    “For her to be acquitted in those circumstances really recognizes and affirms that role as witness,” said Mahon.

    It seems like it might be a new defense for injunctions on unceded land.

    • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      3·
      7 months ago

      Oh you’re right, it really is a big deal. The precedent is massive; I hope the cops get taken to the cleaners. The fact we can send ERT’s with C8’s and full combat gear to arrest a bunch of older ladies trying to defend their land, but somehow were completely incapable of stopping the Convoy terrorism in downtown Ottawa, is very, very disturbing.

      • m0darn
        2·
        7 months ago

        I couldn’t find the actual judgement so it’s not clear to me how being a Wet’suwet’en witness defeated the prosecution’s argument that

        The accused’s intent, knowledge or recklessness that public disobedience tends to depreciate the respect for orders of the court

        Which is what’s suggested by the news.