Mr. Ronald J. MacDonald, Q.C.President
Federation of Law Societies of Canada
World Exchange Plaza
45 O'Connor Street, Suite 1810
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1A4
macdonrj@gov.ns.ca
Mr. Jeff Hirsh
Manitoba FLSC National Council Member
jbh@tdslaw.com
Gentleman:
We hereby file a 3-count professional misconduct complaint against The Law Society of Manitoba with the Federation.
Count 1
Failure to provide a Media Citizen Journalist appropriate and sufficient access to LSM meetings.
Background
The basis for this allegation is outlined in the following excerpt from the www.CyberSmokeBlog.blogspot.com posting of July 1, 2011 (OMG VJH is back!):
"On the subject of cojones Blackie has them in spades! He has filed a Charter challenge against the LSM. Early last month we showed up, along with a Crown Prosecutor from Manitoba Justice's Constitutional Law Branch, to attend the sixth meeting - this case is far from discipline hearing ready - only to be barred. After it was over, Mr. Douglas A. Bedford, a lawyer with Manitoba Hydro, came down to explain why we had been excluded. Problem is, he was wrong, wrong and wrong again!
In what sounded at times like a broken record, he went on and on and on ad nauseam about how we could "possibly" be called as a witness at Blackie's disciplinary hearing whenever that takes place. Being a Media Citizen Journalist would place us in a conflict of interest position. Of course, the LSM could never allow that to happen because it was paramount the accused receive a fair hearing. Problem is, it's the complainants who are the issue The Society has it back asswards.
LSM appointed prosecutor David M. Skwark (FillmoreRiley) had at one point sent us an e-mail suggesting the June 3, 2011 meeting was a Pre-Hearing Conference and, as such, was like a Pre-Trial Conference in Queen's Bench where the public is not allowed to attend. That was the basis of learned friend Douglas Bedford's argument.
Here's why we disagree. In a classic textbook SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) in which we were a Co-Defendant, the attorney prosecuting the case for the publicly funded Manitoba Metis Federation (reference www.jus.gov.mb.ca - MMF et al. versus Terry Belhumeur et al. File Number CI 05-01-41955) was able to get a publication ban at the first Pre-Trial Conference (September 8, 2008). Before it ended there were almost 30 Pre-Trials many more than convicted serial killer Willy Pickton likely faced if you can believe it. We self-represented for all but the last one.
During these Pre-Trials, on several occasions both sides debated Motions they'd file. Justice Karen I. Simonsen who presided over all except the final one (she was suddenly and unexpectedly, at least for us replaced by Justice McKelvey) had previously ruled in response to our question whether Motions were open to the public that they indeed were and by extension publishable. However, all other discussion was not.
Back to Blackie. Given the aforementioned, Douglas Bedford erred when he chaired the June 3, 2011 Pre-Hearing Conference and ruled we were to be excluded. Blackie had filed a Motion, therefore, at the minimum we should have been allowed to attend at least that part of the discussion.
The next LSM meeting in the Blackie case could take place this month. Regardless and whenever if there is any discussion related to a motion(s) Blackie has or will file, CyberSmokeBlog should be allowed to attend at least that part dealing with them. Ditto for his Charter challenge.
It is our contention our right as a Media Citizen Journalist to public access information has been violated by The Law Society of Manitoba. We are considering a complaint with the Federation of Law Societies of Canada. Each province has a representative on its National Council. While it would be a miracle if the FLSC were to intervene, nevertheless, it should at least be apprised of the situation."
Section 79(1) does not allow identification of a Defendant unless or until a finding of misconduct has been rendered under penalty of fine and/or possible jail sentence. Accordingly, the Accused has been designated as Blackie based upon author Jack Boyle's fictional character Boston Blackie of the early 1990s. Remember the radio series, television and later movies Gentlemen?
The actions of The Law Society of Manitoba constitute a violation of our Charter rights to freedom of speech, expression and access to public information.
Count 2
Failure of the Law Society of Manitoba to follow and respect its internal policies, procedures and guidelines as set out in the province's Legal Profession Act.
Background
On September 23, 2011 a 3-count Citation was issued against Blackie. It contained the actual initials of the Defendant, both Complainants, a third-Party, as well as, the abbreviation of a well-known organization. Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the case could have readily identified those involved.
When CyberSmokeBlog published the Citation verbatim on the internet it was necessary to correct this oversight so as to protect the individuals and organization involved, as well as, The Law Society of Manitoba from itself.
Count 3
Failure of The Law Society of Manitoba to respect the "Public Interest" provisions as stated in its mandate.
Background
On multiple occasions CyberSmokeBlog has contacted senior officials at the LSM seeking clarification of certain provisions of The Legal Profession Act as it relates to the "publishability" of identities of those involved in Blackie's case. But one example. Does the aforementioned Section 79(1) of the LPA apply equally to the Complainants? The legislation is silent on this matter. However, CSB was told The Society could not provide legal advice. This was not a request for legal advice, rather, the query sought clarification and thus was interpretative by definition.
We look forward to your prompt reply.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Media Citizen Journalist
Blog Master
www.CyberSmokeBlog.blogspot.com
afineblit@lawsociety.mb.ca
kdangerfield@lawsociety.mb.ca
davidskwark@fillmoreriley.com
dbedford@hydro.mb.ca
(ex).jpg)
