On the 12 day March 2024 0950H Timothy- Ryan Luis and Officer Mousavi had an altercation involving “drunk driving.”  Timothy- Ryan Luis was pulled over while he was parked.  The officer approached his vehicle requesting a breathalyzer from him.  Timothy- Ryan Luis started to claim that “this is unconstitutional.”  He refused and as a result of duress, Police using two units and bearing arms, he did the exam.  Timothy- Ryan Luis as a result of this issue composed a Legal Matter sueing the officer on multiple charges – criminal harassment and battery.  Timothy- Ryan Luis questions her “judgement” in pulling him over without any legal basis.  With this incident, Timothy- Ryan Luis on the basis of this incident, “demands” that citizens have the right to fine state workers for misconduct.  A Policy brief is annexed herein as “ANNEX A” to explain the request by virtue of quantum meruit.  

As a result, I/ we request mandamus via the Judiciary to implement the Policy brief in question.  We request this on the basis of the following values:  equality, equity, justice, and fairness.  Further to this, we have collected signatures from citizens in the community with regards to the subject matter all supporting the judicial review.  

ANNEX "A"

SOCIAL:  PROPOSED POLICY CHANGES: FINING STATE WORKERS                                      
Subject:  SOCIAL PROPOSED POLICY CHANGES/ FINING LEGAL INFARCTIONS BY THE CITIZEN

Purpose.  There is a need for equity within the judiciary.  Several laws that have been passed within the most recent years have made it very difficult for individuals in society to gain equity.  

Issue:  There is not enough action in obtaining equitable recourse for government worker violations to citizens.

Background

There is a myth in law that states that the law was created to protect the high income earners of society (Independent Institute 1997).  This has caused many unjust and unfair laws.  Such examples include:  

Same Sex Marriage- violation of equality

ICBC no fault laws- violation of equality and inequitable 

Prison work pay – inequitable 

With those, it becomes a matter of equity, fairness, justice and equality.  Legal infarctions by government staff and authorities have been a common occurrence in Canada.  

Gordon Campbell- DUI

Doug Ford- Crack Cocaine use

Doug McCallum- Injury to a pedestrian

This has caused a lot of social decay.  Social decay can be defined as Social decay can be defined as institutional disorder caused by a lack of adherence to the rule of law.  As a result, interventions need to be put in place in order to make laws fair to the citizens as prevised by the Constitution and the Magna Carta that came before it.  Canadian law originated from England and France wherein social rebellions caused upheaval and in turn governments were created along with the laws of the land.  The French Revolt is a clear example of a depiction of treatment that has gone way beyond what people can handle.  It is not safe and it is not fair to the citizen to be treated with legal violation by government staff and law enforcement.  With specific concern, there was an incident with an individual in the municipality of Surrey wherein the citizen was parked to avoid distracted driving.  Several minutes into the activity, an RCMP Officer approached him by turning on her sirens and parking behind his vehicle.  This caused an altercation and as a result the individual and the Police were debating about the legal basis by which the citizen was pulled over.  The citizen denied any legal infarction and the Police insisted that he was wrong.  This exacerbated the individual’s emotions and as a result the Officer called back up.  The back up RCMP arrived and the individual was forced into taking a breathalyzer before ending the interaction.  Although the breathalyzer was negative, the Individual claims that the Officer harassed him and pushed him physically.  The individual is currently attempting to sue for pain and suffering – a tenant of equity an origin of the Court of Chancery in the UK.  

Considerations

Most laws are clearly put into place because of voting.  With the inequity detailed herein, what demographic votes for the inequitable laws above especially when there are more people at the base of the society- income wise.  A reason by which people would vote for an unjust inequitable law could be advertising.  There are several media conglomerates that command most of the entire industry and Politicians are forced to select one of them in order to advertise their platform.  More often than not, there are debates with the Politician and the Service Provider wherein Politicians must comply to the terms of the Service Provider and if they do not, they won’t get the contract for their platform under that Service Provider.  The media conglomerates explained are as follows:  

AT&T (Time Warner, CNN, HBO)

News Corp (Fox News, Wall Street Journal, New York Post)

Sony (HBO and Cinemax, Turner Entertainment Networks, Adult Swim and Cartoon Network, CNN News Group, DC Entertainment and Films, Warner Bros Pictures)

Comcast (NBC Universal, Telemundo, Universal Pictures)

Disney (ABC, ESPN, Pixar, Marvel Studios)

ViacomCBS (CBS, Paramount Pictures)

Publications originated from the need to affect public opinion.  It is publications such as the New York Times that permitted the change of public opinion during the Great Depression.  This caused massive changes as people were provided with information regarding banking, securities and commissions.  Evidentially private banks were shut down because of mass withdrawals caused by the publications.  This resulted in the banking system that is in place currently.  

Options  

1.        Keep things unchanged- This option is not recommended.  If this option is selected, the injustice continues.  This is going to result in people grouping together to cause social change in a bid to obtain equity.  This is the most feasible option and it’s the most convenient option however, the bearing results because of these does not enough to change the inequity in society as 1 in 9 people in Canada live in poverty.  Further according to Stats Canada, they say that 37.37% of people are in the middle class and 30.76% are in the lower class.  That is a total of 68.13% of the population would benefit from another selection.  At the least, individuals still have the ability to charge government workers through law enforcement via the judiciary.  However, as a result of equity laws being dismantled in Canada, many are going to suffer.  

2.        Advertise- This option is the in-between.  This would permit citizens to identify if there is an actual problem within the society as it pertains to government workers.  Through interest articulation and interest aggregation, Political Scientist can collect data and evidence contrary to the current system in place.  Hence this would be a secure option as suspicions can be verified without a reasonable doubt.  Lastly, advertising begins the process of gaining equity for the citizen as it allows for increased public awareness where then public opinion is swayed.  

3.      Fine the offending public worker- Fining a public worker comes from the proponents of pain and suffering.  Equity for pain and suffering is not prioritized in Canada.  This results in violations by government officials.  These violations by government workers can be of various torts.  In the above example regarding the citizen that was pulled over, it was a tort of harassment and battery.  It is very uncommon for a citizen to desire to fine an Officer of Law or even a government worker.  This is because many of the people do not possess the critical thinking skills and intellect or competency to articulate and aggregate a societal need as a result of an experience he or she has gone through.  This result in wide spread public ignorance.  This option is very equitable.  It provides rectifications for the unjust laws that have been passed by several governments.  As for justice, citizens under the Constitution have equal protection under the Law.  Should that not mean that there should also be a Criminal Code like doctrine by which citizens can fine offending government workers through equity doctrines of the past?  This then is the fairest option.  It also would prevent the emotional results that occur after an inequitable encounter.  Regardless, there is still a means by which to charge offending government workers however, there is not a fine schedule of equitable resources such as compensation of monies for infarctions by government workers notwithstanding the RCMP.  The fining of Public workers can occur through quantum meruit. 

Recommendation:

Option three is recommended.