Ontario superior court castigates the effects of creeping Wokism in family proceedings

March 3, 2022

The following excerpts come from a judgement by Mr. Justice A. Pazaratz of the Ontario Superior Court. The full judgement can be found here: 2022 ONSC 1198 (CanLII) | J.N. v. C.G. | CanLII

“When did it become illegal to ask questions?  Especially in the courtroom?

[2]               And when did it become unfashionable for judges to receive answers?  Especially when children’s lives are at stake?

[3]               How did we lower our guard and let the words “unacceptable beliefs” get paired together? In a democracy? On the Scales of Justice?

[4]               Should judges sit back as the concept of “Judicial Notice” gets hijacked from a rule of evidence to a substitute for evidence  

 [5]               And is “misinformation” even a real word? Or has it become a crass, self-serving tool to pre-empt scrutiny and discredit your opponent?  To de-legitimize questions and strategically avoid giving answers.  Blanket denials are almost never acceptable in our adversarial system.  Each party always has the onus to prove their case and yet “misinformation” has crept into the court lexicon.  A childish – but sinister – way of saying “You’re so wrong, I don’t even have to explain why you’re wrong.”

[17]           The mother’s evidence focused entirely on the medical and scientific issues.

[18]           In contrast, the father focussed extensively on labelling and discrediting the mother as a person, in a dismissive attempt to argue that her views aren’t worthy of consideration.  

a.   This odious trend is rapidly corrupting modern social discourse: Ridicule and stigmatize your opponent as a person, rather than dealing with the ideas they want to talk about. 

b.   It seems to be working for politicians. 

c.   But is this really something we want to tolerate in a court system where parental conduct and beliefs are irrelevant except as they impact on a parent’s ability to meet the needs of a child?

[22]           But there’s a bigger problem here.  An uglier problem.

[23]           We’re seeing more and more of this type of intolerance, vilification and dismissive character assassination in family court.  Presumably we’re seeing it inside the courtroom because it’s rampant outside the courtroom.  It now appears to be socially acceptable to denounce, punish and banish anyone who doesn’t agree with you. ” 

Lloyd Robertson