Bruce Clark forced into exile in Holland


CBC Radio: Early Edition with Hal Wakes, October 19 / 95, 7:16 AM PST

- transcribed by the Aboriginal Sovereignty Support Committee

[SISIS note: The following mainstream interview is provided for reference only. It may contain biased and distorted information and may be missing pertinent facts and/or context.]

HW: It's now sixteen minutes after seven o'clock. This is the Early Edition on CBC radio, 690 on the South Coast. My name is Hal Wakes.

HW: Native rights lawyer Bruce Clark failed to appear in a Williams Lake Court yesterday to face charges of Contempt of Court and assualting a police officer. The charges resulted from a scuffle in a Williams Lake courtroom last month. Clark is perhaps best know for representing the Gustafsen Lake rebels during their standoff with the RCMP last month. We've reached Bruce Clark in Amsterdam where he says he is living in exile.

HW: Good Morning.

BC: Good Morning.

HW: Why didn't you appear in court yesterday in Williams Lake?

BC: Well, first in your introduction you said the charges resulted from a scuffle, that's incorrect. The charges did not result from a scuffle. The charges against me resulted from the fact that I accused the judge of misprison of treason, fraud and complicity in genocide, which is a charge I can substantiate in terms of hard law. In response to that charge, the judge became hysterical and had the police officers assault me at the counsel table in court. I defended myself. Now, having sort of clarified the factual basis for the charges, the reason I'm in exile is because in order to cover up the crimes in which our Canadian judiciary are engaged, this one judge has cited me for contempt of court. That is basically he is insisting that I recant the truth, apologize and if not the threat is I will be kept in jail until I do that. This is absolutely an outrageous overturning of every principle on which the rule of law is based. I don't propose to sacrifice the interests of my clients in pursuing justice by allowing the criminal court, and that is the judges who are behaving in a criminal fashion, to essentially silence the messanger by keeping me in jail indefinitely. That's why I'm in exile.

HW: Why did you choose Amsterdam?

BC: I chose Amsterdam because it was the cheapest flight available.

HW: What kind of extradition treaty does Canada have with the Netherlands?

BC: I do not know.

HW: Had nothing to do with the decision to go to the Netherlands.

BC: No.

HW: You as a lawyer, I guess you might be able to help me with this, I think you are an officer of the court, are you not?

BC: That's right and it is precisely because I'm an officer of the court that I am under a duty to inform the court when it is engaged in criminally unconstitutional behaviour. When I can carry out that duty to the court because the judges are hurt by the truth, embarrassed by the truth, they become hysterical and cite me for contempt. I am carrying out my duty as an officer of the court which is the reason the charges are against me.

HW: What are you going to do in the Netherlands? Presumably this is the end of your legal career.

BC: It is the end of my legal career only in so far as its ended for practical purposes in Canada until such time as the Canadian judiciary starts to behave in accordance with the rule of law. Now this isn't an unusual situation in the world. Almost every country goes through growing pains and various stages where high officials in it form the impression they are above the law.That has happened in fact with our judiciary at the present time. Where that happens and where their pretence has genocidal consequences, traditionally, what right thinking people do who are under a duty is flee the country and attempt to make their plea to the international community of nations and the to the international legal community. That's what I'm doing. In a legal capacity, I'm representing my clients interests by explaining to the international community the travesty of justice of genocidal consequence that is being played out in British Columbia Courts today.

HW: We have a system of law that provides for all kinds of checks and balances and rights of appeal and courts of appeal and different individuals involved at all of those levels. What you're suggesting is a kind of grand conspiracy throughout the whole legal system to somehow stamp out your right to express your point of view when in fact many people would see you simply as a law breaker who is refusing to face the issue in court.

BC: Well whether or not I'm a law breaker depends upon the law at which you are looking. My point is that in order to address the law you have to look at the whole law, the same as when you look at the facts, you have to look at the whole truth. Now the whole law in this case consists of the constitutional law and the criminal law. The constitutional law upon which this country was founded since the 18th century says that where judges assume jurisdiction in unsurrendered Indian territory by definition they are guilty of misprison of treason and fraud. The fact is that occured in British Columbia, notably in 1864, Judge Bigbie had hung a group of Chilcotin Indians. In hard constitutional law, that was an act of murder by the judge. Now when you say we must look at the law and we must follow these judicial processes that is exactly my point. The difficulty is that when I go into our courts and ask the courts to address this constitutional law, the words of which are absolutely clear and plain, they read those words but they won't address them publically because they know what the truth is. They become hysterical. In their hysteria they cite inferior law, that is law of the criminal code which is a law inferior in status to the Constitution. That is they willfully blind themselves to the Constitution in order to silence the messanger and the criminal weapons that they use in this process is the criminal law process.

HW: You could be making the argument in court rather than ...although I know you have...rather than.....Thank you......

BC: But that's the point. When I made the argument in court, I was cited for contempt.

HW: Thank you for taking our call.

BC: Thank you for cutting me off.

HW: Bye bye.

BC: Bye bye.

HW: Bruce Clark is a native rights lawyer who has gone into exile in Holland.

Back to SIS