GENET archive


REport Lawsuits MAI Nanoose

C/0 CONSTANCE FOGAL LAW OFFICE, #401 -207 West Hastings St., Vancouver, 
B.C. V6B1H7
Tel: (604)687-0588; fax: (604) 872 -1504 or (604) 688-0550;cellular(604) 
202 7334; E-MAIL;

“The constitution of Canada does not belong either to Parliament, or to the 
Legislatures; it belongs to the country and it is there that the citizens 
of the country will find the protection of the rights to which they are 
entitled”  Supreme Court of Canada  A.G. of Nova Scotia and A.G. of Canada, 
S.C.R. 1951 pp 32-33.
==========================================================REPORT on 
LAWSUITS    .................  from Connie Fogal     March 26, 2000

HEARING OF MAI APPEAL Federal Court of Canada, Vancouver BC

DATE: May 26, 2000 or June 12, 2000
TIME: 9:30 AM
PLACE: 700 block  West Georgia St.,  Vancouver BC (Eaton’s Tower)

Judge McKeown in the Federal Court of Canada dismissed our case on the MAI 
as being moot. He said that because the MAI  negotiations at the OECD 
ceased in October 1998, there was nothing left to deal with. He said the 
matter was over because the negotiations  had ended. We appealed because 
the MAI is not dead. Argument on the appeal will be conducted in May or 
June. Please try to come.

The MAI was to be the final expression of the intent, purpose and goal  of 
the current colonizers of the world- an elite force of the fortune 500 
companies who are determined to rule and use the world without any 
restraint on their power and control. The conquest has been unfolding 
incrementally by international agreements (treaties) in process since after 
WW2. Seven years of negotiations removing national restraints on the power 
of the global elite were conducted in what was called the Uruguay Rounds. 
The Uruguay Rounds created numerous treaties that concluded in 1994 by the 
creation of another agreement called the WTO.

The WTO is not a place for conducting negotiations. It is a treaty that 
incorporates the commitments inherent in the agreements arising out  of the 
Uruguay Rounds of negotiations. That commitment is to achieve incrementally 
through successive negotiation sessions the removal of all restraints on 
the free movement of the resources of the world around the world according 
to what is good for the profits of the international corporate and 
financial elite. That means national policies or programs or rules that 
require a sharing, or control, or use of the resources of a country for the 
benefit of its own citizens must be eliminated. Constitutions have to be 
changed or removed so as to be stripped of their powers to command the use 
of the nation’s resources. A restructuring of entire nations, indeed of the 
world, has to take place.

Our lawsuit uses our Constitution, which belongs to us the people, to stop 
this process. Our lawsuit says neither our federal government nor the 
provincial governments, nor industry nor government officials, and 
certainly not the Fortune 500 club have the authority to strip from us the 
rights we are guaranteed under our Constitution. We are sovereign. If our 
country and our rules and our way of life are to have a fundamental 
restructuring, it is only we, the citizens, who will decide, and it must be 
done via a democratic process of electoral representation. We have never 
authorized our Members of Parliament nor our MLA’s to throw away our powers 
under our constitution. Whenever we have been asked via referendum to erode 
our constitution, we have staunchly said “NO” (The Meech Lake  and the 
Charlottetown Accords). Officials of industry or of government have no 
power to impose these changes  save by coercion or duplicity. Nor do non- 
governmental organizations have any  authority to negotiate our 
constitutional entitlements.

The MAI was to be the granddaddy agreement incorporating  and concluding in 
one document the process and the terms that are the substance of the World 
Trade Agreement (WTO)entered in 1994. Negotiations moved venue from the 130 
party WTO over to the 29 member OECD organization after it became clear 
that the less developed nations in the WTO were balking at some terms. 
Membership of the OECD is comprised of only the most developed nations of 
the world. The plan was to conclude the MAI at the OECD and then force it 
on the other nations. The substance of the negotiations was and remains the 
goals and agenda of the WTO. The WTO is an international treaty whose 
parties and process are the vehicle to impose the will of the international 
financial/corporate elite on humanity.

After the MAI negotiations at the OECD were halted in October of 1998, the 
constant negotiation process (that is required by the agreements arising 
out  the Uruguay Rounds and is now cemented in the WTO accord) only had to 
find another avenue to continue  the agenda. That agenda is to meet 
regularly, and at each meeting, to throw more resources into the bowl to 
get closer and closer to the conclusion of total conquest. The Fortune 500 
is baking a pie. The ingredients belong to us. But when the pie is finally 
baked,  we will have no piece and all our ingredients will be in the 
control and exclusive use of, by, and for  the Fortune 500.

The negotiations at the WTO in Seattle in November 1999 and subsequent were 
and are a continuation of the process of the MAI; of the economic and legal 
issues arising in our lawsuit. The government threw away 
Canadian  constitutional rights when it entered the WTO submitting to terms 
that even Parliament has no authority to do under our Constitution. It 
continues to throw more away as it has mandated continuing negotiations 
under the WTO towards total “liberalization”.Our government is 
restructuring and destabilising Canada. Hence we have appealed the McKeown 
decision. That is a step  on our way to the Supreme Court of Canada.

We have a right to know what is being negotiated, how it is being 
negotiated, who decides what is being negotiated, whether or not the terms 
can even be put on the plate, whether or not  we want them on any plate. 
This is what our lawsuit demands to resolve.

Canada formalized its commitment to corporatisation of the world and 
colonization when it implemented the WTO agreement  in Canada via Bill C-57 
on November 30, 1994. Sergio Marchi as Trade Minister and now as Canada’s 
ambassador to the WTO  refers to Canadians as shareholders, not citizens, 
and to Canada as a product, not a country.

The WTO agreement replaces the 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
(GATT) (a real trade agreement) which was subsumed into a 1994 GATT 
becoming part of the WTO. The WTO agreement consists of a general 
agreement, the old and the new GATT, and a number of sector agreements. The 
sector agreements are: Agriculture; Application of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures (here is where the Genetically Modified foods are 
being introduced); Textiles and Clothing; Technical Barriers to Trade; 
Trade- related Investment Measures; Implementation of Article VI of the 
GATT1994; Implementation of article VII of the GATT 1994; Pre-shipment 
Inspection; Rules of Origin; Import Licensing Procedures; Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures; Safeguards; General Agreement on Trade in Services 
(GATS) (here is where the MAI finality is most likely to be realized); 
Trade- related Aspect of Intellectual Property Rights; Rules and Procedures 
Governing the Settlement of Disputes; Trade Policy Review Mechanism; 
Plurality Trade Agreements of Trade in Civil Aircraft, Government 
Procurement, International Dairy Agreement, and International Bovine Meat. 
The goal of these agreements is to harmonise all rules to eliminate 
regulations or policies that interfere with profit no matter where global 
corporations are located from time to time.

What all WTO members commit to is an ongoing liberalization of the economy; 
i.e., what is not  on the table today, will be on the table tomorrow. 
Canada began to formalize and implement  the process under the FTA and then 
extended it under the NAFTA. Next came the MAI effort. Now the negotiators 
are  processing  the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA).  The goal 
is to finalize the FTAA by 2003. These agreements are escalating the 
takeover or death of our industry and our social programs at such a rate 
that it is probable Canada will have reached the point of no return and 
will have lost all its sovereignty within about two to three years. We are 
on a death march.

The losses that Canadians are experiencing as a result of the FTA, the 
NAFTA and the WTO include: the emasculation of our CBC, the loss of our 
railroads, the closed hospitals, the loss of hospital beds, the fracturing 
of  medicare services generally, and the introduction of a two tier system, 
the national Post Office decline of services, the increased costs of all 
levels of education, the skyrocketing debt of students, the end to academic 
freedom in university research, the increasing levels of government debt, 
the rejection of central banks (e.g., the Bank of Canada) as the vehicle 
for creating the nation’s money supply thereby increasing the debtload on 
citizens, the reduction of transfer payments, the downloading from federal 
government to provincial to municipal forcing the cutbacks in services, the 
death of family farms, the bankruptcies of farmers and small businesses, 
the downsizing of industry and related job losses, the increased 
unemployment, the loss of the best jobs as the head offices move outside 
out country, the subjugation of our young people to dead end low paying 
jobs in the service industry, the death of the small professional 
especially accountants and lawyers, as provincial licensing rules are 
lifted opening the way for international corporate domination, etc, etc.

Under NAFTA in 1999, Canada was forced to cancel its ban on the Ethyl 
corporation additive of MMT, pay out $20 million dollars Canadian to Ethyl 
Corporation, and issue a public lie to the people saying that the additive 
was not harmful to health when the scientific data said it is. A sovereign 
country was told by a corporation that it cannot protect its own citizens. 
Under NAFTA, Canada is the subject of another lawsuit from the Sun Belt 
Corporation because British Columbia refuses to let Sunbelt sell our water. 
Under NAFTA, the UPS parcel service is suing Canada for having the audacity 
to  use our own post office to deliver parcels instead of using UPS.

Because the goal of the WTO is to eliminate all forms of regulation that 
interfere with profit, Canadian regulations are being ignored as drugs 
are  pushed onto market without adequate testing for health safety. The 
bovine growth hormone issue is still alive. Canada is leading the pack on 
the efforts to introduce all forms of genetically modified foods without 
delay or regulation. Health Canada scientists are muzzled or punished  for 
speaking out. Efforts of government to regulate the sale and use of 
alcohol, drugs, and gambling for health and safety or to manage the 
activities for their own income are all subject to countervail and 
punishment for interfering with profit of corporations.
And who are the negotiators? Not your Member of Parliament, nor the 
government caucus, nor the Prime Minister. No one you have elected nor who 
is accountable to you nor representative of you. Primarily, the negotiators 
are representatives from industry paid by industry, and  senior bureaucrats 
in our civil service paid handsomely by your tax dollars in the process of 
selling you out.  The negotiating representatives move back and forth 
between the employ of both industry and civil service. To a limited extent, 
there is participation by non governmental organizations in the negotiations.

Simultaneously, within Canada there exists an agreement called the 
Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT). It was signed by the federal government 
and each of the provinces in 1994. This is the instrument being used to 
harmonise our domestic laws  bringing them into line with the WTO 
requirements. Its goals are identical to those of the WTO. The AIT is the 
reason none of the provinces will do a legal challenge to the 
constitutionality of the  FTA or the NAFTA or the MAI or the FTAA or the 
WTO. They have promised to harmonise the provinces with the demands of the 
WTO by a similar process of regular negotiations each time stripping away 
more power and control from the people. Incrementally they put more and 
more of our rights on the table to be thrown away. During the 1999 
negotiations, it was only the vigorous opposition of public minded 
officials from British Columbia that  kept medicare, hospitalization, 
education, and municipal procurement policies off the negotiation table. 
But the beast is hungrily waiting for tomorrow because it knows the feast 
will resume.

The signatories to the text of the  AIT signed on July 18th 1994 are Jean 
Chrétien for Canada, B. Leskey for Ontario, John Savage for Nova Scotia, 
Gary Filmon for Manitoba, Catherine Canbera (?) for Prince Edward Island, 
Ralph Klein for Alberta, J. Ostasluk for the Territories, Dan Johnson for 
Québec, Frank McKenna for New Brunswick, Michael Harcourt for British 
Columbia, Roy Romanow for Saskatchewan, Clyde Wells for Newfoundland, 
(illegible) for Northwest Territories.

Then in September and October of 1994 the following signatories verified 
and authenticated the text of the AIT agreement: John Manley for Canada, 
Sept 12,1994, Frances Lanlin (?) for Ontario, Sept 19,1994, Rick Bragg for 
Nova Scotia, September 8,1994, Jim Downey for Manitoba, Sept 3,1994, Robert 
Morrissey for Prince Edward Island, October 5,1994,  Gerard Tremblay and 
Dan Johnson for Québec, Sept 6,1994, L. McAdom for New Brunswick, Sept 
6,1994, Glen Clark for British Columbia, Sept. 16,1994,  D. Lynfelt for 
Saskatchewan, Sept 13,1994, Ken Kowalski for Alberta, Sept 16,1994, Clyde 
Wells and another illegible name for Newfoundland and Labrador, 
Oct.06,1994, (name illegible) for the Northwest Territories, Sept 15,1994, 
(name illegible) for the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental affairs, 
(name illegible) for the Yukon Territory, Sept 14,1994.

So when any politician tells you that medicare or hospitalisation or 
culture or water, or education, or the environment, or democracy, or 
sovereignty, etc. are not at risk by the WTO or the NAFTA or the FTAA, they 
are either lying or are ignorant of the process surrounding them, or both. 
In any case they do not deserve to sit and should be removed from the 
Legislature or Parliament a.s.a.p. while there is still a smidgeon of time 
to save ourselves.

Canada is in its death throes because sovereignty and democracy are in 
their death throes. Canada and all other nations states are being 
dismantled by the restructuring  caused by the principles enshrined in the 
WTO and IMF. Humankind is being impoverished. The effect on Canada of the 
FTA and the NAFTA and the WTO  is the inevitable annexation of Canada by 
default to the United States of America. There, too, sovereignty and 
democracy are destined to the dust bin under the global process of the WTO. 
Nation states and the voter franchise are doomed under the WTO principles.

On the positive side, Canada is one of the few countries in the world with 
a Constitution that can be used to challenge this process of 
corporatisation and colonization. In that sense we are a beacon of hope for 
many citizens elsewhere who have only the electoral vehicle as a means of 
defending themselves. If we had one strong nation in the world prepared to 
stand up to resist the evil beast of corporatisation, there could be a real 
chance of taking back democracy and sovereignty throughout the world. (A US 
congressman has presented a motion in the USA to get out of the WTO.)

It is clear that none of the five parties sitting in Ottawa  nor any 
province of Canada is prepared to call for the abrogation of the FTA, or 
the NAFTA, or to refuse to enter the FTAA, or to call for the abolition of 
the IMF, or to demand a use of the 1947 GATT rules  for fair and real trade 
rather than  the WTO investment rules. That means that in Canada the only 
way to halt this process before the next federal election is to use the 
vehicle of the courts, pending a revolutionary electoral development.

We need ongoing financial support. The government uses our tax dollars to 
pay  its lawyers to fight us, but we have to raise our funds privately to 
defend ourselves. Please continue to be generous in the interest of all of 
us. Our outstanding account with the lawyers on the MAI lawsuit is 
$8,682.79. This includes all work and disbursements to date including the 
appeal documentation.

On THE NANOOSE BAY LAWSUIT, we still await the judgement of Prothonetary 
Hargraves from the hearing of December 10,1999 respecting our standing and 
the Federal government production of documents. It is not unusual for a 
federal court interlocutory judgement to be 6 to 8 months before it is 
pronounced. The delay is an indication of how seriously the judge is taking 
the matter. It would be very easy to dismiss the case and make a defensive 
judgement. He commented at the end of the argument that he knew there would 
be an appeal no matter which way he came down. Accordingly he is being 
very, very careful.

On the matter of our appeal of the Federal Court order that refused an 
interim injunction to prevent the takeover of the Nanoose lands by the 
federal government, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed our application 
as being moot. Our lawyers recommend an appeal to the Supreme Court of 
Canada as all these matters have to get that far for constitutional rulings 
of any import.

On the Nanoose proceedings, we have an outstanding legal bill of $34,482.00.

You can get a tax benefit by making a contribution to the lawsuits by 
contributing through the Canadian Action Party which will keep 10 % for its 
handling. Make the cheque payable to the Canadian Action Party but on the 
left hand bottom face of the cheque, please designate that the money is to 
go to MAI lawsuit or Nanoose lawsuit. Mail it to the Canadian Action Party 
at 99 Atlantic Ave, suite 302, Toronto Ontario, M6K3J8.

If you contribute directly via the Defence of Canadian Liberty Committee, 
we are unable to give you a tax benefit, but the lawsuit gets all the 
money. For the MAI lawsuit, please make the cheque payable to the Defence 
of Canadian Liberty Committee. For the Nanoose lawsuit,  make the cheque 
payable to Harry Rankin Nanoose. Mail all  to : Defence of Canadian Liberty 
Committee c/o #401 -207 West Hasting St. Vancouver BC V6B1H7

I am meticulous in acknowledging all receipts. Regarding the Nanoose Bay 
lawsuit, if you have donated via any other means intending your 
contribution to come to our lawsuits to pay the legal bills of the lawyers 
conducting the case, namely Rocco Galati, or Azevedo and Company (Harry 
Rankin charges no fee nor any disbursements)and have not received 
acknowledgement from me, then I have not received your money. There were 
other routes suggested as being available so contributors could  get a  tax 
benefit. If you used those, kindly contact them directly and tell them to 
send on your donation to Harry Rankin Nanoose at #401 -207 West Hasting St 
Vancouver BC V6B1H7. Some of you may have used the Green Party or the Human 
Rights Institute.  We have received no funds via either one.

It was never the intention that  any of the plaintiffs in Nanoose would be 
keeping any funds for their individual organizations, except that the Human 
Rights Institute indicated it could give a tax benefit but would keep 50 % 
of the contribution for its handling and costs, and remit the other 50 % 
for the lawsuit legal fees and disbursement of the lawyers conducting the 
case. When you make a contribution directly through the Defence of Canadian 
Liberty Committee,  all contributions go to the lawyers conducting the case 
except for the costs of reporting to you. None comes to me for my 
administrative costs or as fees to me for my professional or personal time 
or work on the case.

In the future, please donate via the Canadian Action Party if you want a 
tax benefit for either lawsuit, but remember they will keep 10 
%.  Otherwise, mail directly to  my office if a tax benefit is not 
necessary for you. You may wish to make a regular monthly contribution for 
a number of months to sustain the lawsuit. Foreign funds and contributions 
are welcome... Yours truly,  Connie Fogal


I enclose _____ $10.00 _______$20.00 ________ $25.00 ________ $40.00 
________ $50.00
  _____ $ 100.00 ______ $200.00 ________ $500.00 _________other amount.
Please apply my donation to:       The MAI 
lawsuit                      _____________
                                      The Nanoose Bay 
lawsuit               _____________

_____My cheque is made out to the Defence of Canadian Liberty Committee for 
the MAI lawsuit.
_____My cheque is made out to Harry Rankin Nanoose for the Nanoose Bay lawsuit.

I am Mailing To:
_______Defence of Canadian Liberty Committee, #401 -207 West Hasting 
St.,  Vancouver BC V6B1H7
_______ the Canadian Action Party, 99 Atlantic Ave, suite 302, Toronto 
Ontario, M6K3J8 which will keep 10 % of my contribution for administrative 
costs, and will send me a tax receipt.
C/0 CONSTANCE FOGAL LAW OFFICE, #401 -207 West Hastings St., Vancouver, 
B.C. V6B1H7
Tel: (604)687-0588; fax: (604) 872 -1504 or (604) 688-0550;cellular(604) 
202 7334;

“The constitution of Canada does not belong either to Parliament, or to the 
Legislatures; it belongs to the country and it is there that the citizens 
of the country will find the protection of the rights to which they are 
entitled” Supreme Court of Canada  A.G. of Nova Scotia and A.G. of Canada, 
S.C.R. 1951 pp 32