RailGate's Limited Hangout....

.
.....Are Lotusland's Pro-Pundit's Buying It?

AllThePrivilegeThatFits
StoneWallVille


We're talking, here, about the notion that the waiving of 'cabinet' privilege might actually be a ruse to allow for the continued suppression of a select group of 'sensitive' documents that are critically relevant to the guilt or innocence of the accused in the RailGate case.

This issue has come to full flower because British Columbia Deputy AG Allan Seckel wrote the following in yesterday to opposition MLA Leonard Krog in response to questions raised in the Legislature the day before:

"I am satisfied that as of [today] there are no documents that have not been disclosed based on any assertion of cabinet privilege."


First it was Mike Smyth that, despite questions about the process, seemed to accept the limited 'cabinet' privilege hangout that was first invoked by Premier Gordon Campbell in the Legislature last spring.

And now, based on his column today, it appears to be Vaughn Palmer's turn:

(But).....in my reading, the deputy attorney-general's letter has diminished one of the outstanding concerns in this case, that cabinet secrecy would be invoked to prevent evidence from being aired in court.


And as for that doppleganger called 'solicitor-client' privilege that still hangs over the accuseds' heads?

Well, apparently, that is of a lesser consequence.

Again, from Mr. Palmer's column:

And the prospect, acknowledged by Seckel, that some material may be withheld on grounds of solicitor-client privilege.

On the latter point, Seckel says "there has been no attempt by anyone to influence my decisions on legal privilege, either."

Sure thing.

But what, exactly, are those decisions Mr. Seckel? And why, given that the deal was agreed upon in late 2003 and finalized in mid-2004, are they even an issue?

OK?

.