TORONTO - A year after her release from jail over G20-related conspiracy charges, Amanda Hiscocks returned to court to fight the constitutionality of her “no-demonstration” bail condition.
She and co-accused Alex Hundert represented themselves during the hearing Thursday seeking to get a clear definition what “demonstration” means.
“We want (the judge) to put it in writing, so they can’t pull this stunt on us or the co-accused,” the 37-year-old Guelph resident said. “I think it’s a really scary trend to say that people, for years on end, can’t do any work in their community — it doesn’t meet the charter when you’re imposing these conditions.”
The wording of the no-demonstration condition states that those under it should “not plan for, assist in planning for, attend at or participate in any public demonstrations.”
In September, Hundert, 31, was arrested for violating his bail conditions after speaking at a Ryerson University G20 panel.
The definition blankets everything from marching in street protests to attending lectures, debates, film screenings and community meetings, the pair argued.
“This is what this challenge is about — to take one of those weapons the court and police have to use against communities — off the table,” Hundert said outside the courthouse.
“We believe ‘demonstration’ is very obviously a large street protest and not a public meeting where people are having discussions. And we are attempting to get the court to assert this position the police have taken is erroneous.”
Madame Justice Bonnie Croll ordered both sides to come to a resolution of the definition of “demonstration” by Aug. 4.
If Hiscocks and Hundert and the Crown cannot come to an agreement, a hearing will be scheduled for four days in late August, Croll said.
“I’m encouraging resolution, I’m encouraging conversation,” the judge said. “I’m trying to help here.”
Hiscocks and Hundert are among 17 people still facing conspiracy charges related to last summer’s G20 protests.
Source: http://www.torontosun.com
She and co-accused Alex Hundert represented themselves during the hearing Thursday seeking to get a clear definition what “demonstration” means.
“We want (the judge) to put it in writing, so they can’t pull this stunt on us or the co-accused,” the 37-year-old Guelph resident said. “I think it’s a really scary trend to say that people, for years on end, can’t do any work in their community — it doesn’t meet the charter when you’re imposing these conditions.”
The wording of the no-demonstration condition states that those under it should “not plan for, assist in planning for, attend at or participate in any public demonstrations.”
In September, Hundert, 31, was arrested for violating his bail conditions after speaking at a Ryerson University G20 panel.
The definition blankets everything from marching in street protests to attending lectures, debates, film screenings and community meetings, the pair argued.
“This is what this challenge is about — to take one of those weapons the court and police have to use against communities — off the table,” Hundert said outside the courthouse.
“We believe ‘demonstration’ is very obviously a large street protest and not a public meeting where people are having discussions. And we are attempting to get the court to assert this position the police have taken is erroneous.”
Madame Justice Bonnie Croll ordered both sides to come to a resolution of the definition of “demonstration” by Aug. 4.
If Hiscocks and Hundert and the Crown cannot come to an agreement, a hearing will be scheduled for four days in late August, Croll said.
“I’m encouraging resolution, I’m encouraging conversation,” the judge said. “I’m trying to help here.”
Hiscocks and Hundert are among 17 people still facing conspiracy charges related to last summer’s G20 protests.
Source: http://www.torontosun.com
No comments:
Post a Comment