24-11-2018, 04:05 PM
James:
Your comments are all very good and one of them was suggested by the prothonotary judge during the last teleconference. She suggested that the archives create a "privilege log." What this is, is someone who is independent, how this person will be chosen has yet to be determined, would review each letter that has been considered as subject to privilege would write the details about the letter in a log and indicate if that letter is subject to privilege.
The archives have not been very specific about why these documents are subject to privilege and I told this to the court and it is one aspect of my case. Archives was very vague about why they were subject to privilege, and they provided no evidence to prove that an actual lawyer examined each of his letters, and there are thousands of them. There is a case in Canada where a judge stated that just because a lawyer sends a letter to someone, it is not subject to privilege. The judge also stated that each letter must be examined to determine if it is privileged communication. This case is important because it requires each letter to be examined, it is not enough for the archives to state that he is lawyer therefore his letters are privileged.
A problem with the letters is that they do not specify a client. In Canada, for a lawyer's communication to be private, it must specify a client and a legal issue that the lawyer is working on behalf of his client. The Bloomfield letters do not specify a client such as the United Nations or anyone else for that matter.
Our version of the administrative procedures act is an application for judicial review. This allows any Canadian citizen to ask the federal court of Canada to review a decision made by a government department or agency. In my case I submitted an application to the court to review the archive's decision to withhold Bloomfield's documents from me.
Subpoenaing internal records is a good idea and it is an option I am considering. I may ask for this if a deal can't be worked out with them. I already have some of their internal records from the case brought by Maurice Phillips, a Montreal based researcher who took them to court twice over these files.
Your comments are all very good and one of them was suggested by the prothonotary judge during the last teleconference. She suggested that the archives create a "privilege log." What this is, is someone who is independent, how this person will be chosen has yet to be determined, would review each letter that has been considered as subject to privilege would write the details about the letter in a log and indicate if that letter is subject to privilege.
The archives have not been very specific about why these documents are subject to privilege and I told this to the court and it is one aspect of my case. Archives was very vague about why they were subject to privilege, and they provided no evidence to prove that an actual lawyer examined each of his letters, and there are thousands of them. There is a case in Canada where a judge stated that just because a lawyer sends a letter to someone, it is not subject to privilege. The judge also stated that each letter must be examined to determine if it is privileged communication. This case is important because it requires each letter to be examined, it is not enough for the archives to state that he is lawyer therefore his letters are privileged.
A problem with the letters is that they do not specify a client. In Canada, for a lawyer's communication to be private, it must specify a client and a legal issue that the lawyer is working on behalf of his client. The Bloomfield letters do not specify a client such as the United Nations or anyone else for that matter.
Our version of the administrative procedures act is an application for judicial review. This allows any Canadian citizen to ask the federal court of Canada to review a decision made by a government department or agency. In my case I submitted an application to the court to review the archive's decision to withhold Bloomfield's documents from me.
Subpoenaing internal records is a good idea and it is an option I am considering. I may ask for this if a deal can't be worked out with them. I already have some of their internal records from the case brought by Maurice Phillips, a Montreal based researcher who took them to court twice over these files.