Paul Legall
The Hamilton Spectator
BRANTFORD (May 31, 2008)
A lawyer for the City of Brantford compared the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) to a criminal organization that's extorting fees from the Brantford development community.
Neil Smitheman also suggested to Superior Court Justice Gerald Taylor yesterday that the native-run HDI has, in effect, created a "shadow government" that has usurped the local municipality.
"It constitutes an unlawful conspiracy ... a public nuisance unique to the City of Brantford. It has had a direct impact on the City of Brantford's ability to govern," Smitheman said.
He said native protesters have been scaring off developers by blocking construction sites, intimidating workers and referring developers to the HDI.
He then quoted a number of fees a developer would have to pay to the HDI for his project to go ahead.
"There's no other word for it ... It's a shakedown ... as close to extortion as you can get," Smitheman told the judge.
He made the arguments to support his application for an injunction that would prohibit natives from protesting at any development sites in the city. The injunction names the HDI and HDI employee Hazel Hill and its legal adviser, Aaron Detlor, as defendants in the actions as well several native protesters, including Ruby and Floyd Montour.
The judge reserved judgment on Smitheman's proposal as well as an application to appoint a case management judge to deal with the myriad of issues and motions that may arise during the injunction proceedings.
While waiting for a ruling on the injunction application, which could take weeks, Smitheman asked the judge to impose some interim measures to restore the "rule of law" and prevent protesters from interfering with or obstructing workers at construction sites.
In his own material filed with the court, Detlor denied the HDI was using protesters to extort payments from developers.
"At no time did I, or to my knowledge Hazel Hill, advise, influence or direct any individuals to participate in any activity on any development property either before or after a developer had met with the HDI," he stated in his affidavit.
Marlys Edwardh, who represented Detlor, suggested the city's injunction application was flawed because it didn't name a number of parties that would be affected if it was approved. She said the Attorney General of Canada should have been named because the city of Brantford stated the army should be put on notice in case the protesters start a riot.
She also suggested the proposed injunction would impinge on aboriginal constitutional and treaty rights as well as land rights and freedom of speech.
Edwardh said she wasn't prepared to accept the city's evidence that protesters were breaking the law, unless she saw police occurrence reports and had an opportunity to cross examine witnesses.
Lou Strezos, who represented the HDI, also disputed Smitheman's assertion that the law of order had to be restored in the city.
"It's important to look out of the window," he told the judge, referring to the peaceful protest that was in progress in front of the courthouse.
"There is no riot in the City of Brantford," he stated. "This is not the FLQ crisis."
He was referring to the situation in Quebec in 1970 when the War Measures Act was used to bring in the army when terrorists kidnapped a British trade minister and Quebec cabinet minister.