Blackmore seeks funding to challenge polygamy law
POLYGAMY / 'It is in the interests of justice to do so,' says his lawyer
Jeremy Hainsworth / National / Monday, March 29, 2010
Share |

BC polygamous leader Winston Blackmore needs government funding and special standing to take part in a case that will test Canada's polygamy law, argued his lawyer in court on March 26.

Meanwhile, the provincial attorney general's laywers told Chief Justice Robert Bauman that Blackmore is a narcissist and believes the polygamy reference coming before the BC Supreme Court is all about him.

Not so, said Blackmore's lawyer, Joe Arvay, arguing Blackmore needs court standing on par with the federal and attorneys general to ensure his side of the story comes out.

"It is in the interests of justice to do so," Arvay said.

Indeed, Arvay claimed, the provincial attorney general has said it wanted to put a human face on polygamy for the reference.

"That human face is Mr Blackmore," Arvay said.

And, while he acknowledged there are other groups with an interest in the reference outcome, Arvay said the reference is "about the FLDS and Mr Blackmore."

Blackmore and Oler are rival leaders of two separate factions of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints' (FLDS) commune in Bountiful in southeastern BC.

They were arrested on Jan 7, 2009, and charged with one count each of polygamy.

The charges were quashed in September 2009 when a BC Supreme Court justice accepted Blackmore's argument that the province had gone special prosecutor "shopping" to find someone who would lay charges.

The reference was requested by the provincial government to determine whether Section 293 of the Criminal Code, which outlaws polygamy, is constitutional or not.

Arvay told Bauman that Blackmore's voice is one of many that needs to be heard in the reference, the first of its kind to be heard in a trial court in Canada.

The March 26 hearing was rife with references to high-profile queer cases — among them the Little Sister's-Canada Customs book seizure case, the Cynthia Maughan versus UBC case on discrimination around a transgressive literature course and the same-sex marriage reference.

In the Maughan case, Arvay referred to a section of a ruling addressing Maughan's application for costs.

In such a case, there is something to be said for requiring the government to fund the litigation, since it initiated the suit with a view to testing its own law for the benefit of the public, the decision says.

Arvay says the situation is a test case and Blackmore should have the right to the counsel of his choice.

"Mr Blackmore believes he has been persecuted by the state," Arvay said. "They are a community that has been under attack."

Indeed, myriad groups have come forward as interveners in the case, including polyamorous groups, many drawn from the queer community.

That list of interveners includes the Canadian Polyamory Advocacy Association, the BC Civil Liberties Association, REAL Women, West Coast Legal Education and Action Fund, the Catholic Organization for Life, Stop Polygamy in Canada, and Beyond Borders.

As such, the governments' lawyers argue, the case isn't just about Blackmore or Bountiful, or even fundamentalist Mormons, no matter what side of the US-Canadian border they're on.

However, none of the interveners has applied for funding to mount the case as Blackmore has.

What's more, the attorneys general say Blackmore should be content to accept similar status.

Indeed, it's a status Oler has accepted.

However, Blackmore won't. Arvay said Blackmore would boycott the case and not testify. That led to accusations from the government attorneys that the religious leader was attempting to hold the court hostage.

So, it leaves Justice Baumann to decide if Blackmore's testimony is more vital to the case than that of the interveners.

When that decision comes, though, is unknown, as the judge reserved decision.

And, when the case itself gets underway at an as-yet-unknown date, the BC attorney general will call a host of witnesses, said lawyer Craig Jones.

Those will include experts in evolutionary psychology, economics, sociology and anthropology.

Jones said the practice results in community gender imbalances.

"Polygamy must necessarily lead to child brides . . . and an increasing sexualization and recruitment of child brides," he said.

Further he said, with excess young males ejected from the FLDS society, there are corresponding increases in crime, rape, prostitution and sex trafficking.

"Every plural wife as a matter of fact will produce a child bride or a lost boy," Jones said.



Share |


Reader Comments


 
Yawn
Jones' comments are out of line. He is speaking about a particular religion, and attributing that to all polygamists. And even in that context, I suspect he's not being truthful. If there are child brides, where are the prosecutions?
Randy, Windsor ON
03/29/10 10:10 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Shame
I truly hope the gay community in general doesn't support these under age sexual practises as some continue to blindly support Blackmore and his gang in Bountiful. I have no problem with adults having as many wives or husbands as they wish, however, I do have a problem with an old man being 'married' (and having sex with) 12 & 13 year old girls. Shame on the selfish views of some that condone this practise for their own sexual needs, desires, and advancements.
Jeff Taylor, Toronto Ontario
03/30/10 12:30 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Polygamists in Canada
You miss the point of Polygamy. Polygamy has NOTHING to do with underage marriage or sex. Perhaps read the Criminal code on Polygamy in Canada. Its also different than the USA. Polygamy laws are to protect property and personal rights in Canada. All citizens of Canada, except in Saskatchewan, must follow the Criminal code of Canada in not allowing multiple conjugal unions. A conjugal union means a married like state of being. One must make claim in a family court to be anothers legal spouse (while one of them is already married) to constitute polygamy. Additionally, a person could claim to have legal or religeous AUTHORITY to create sunsequent conjugal unions..perform a legal (as in a judement) or religeous ceremony (simultaneous to existing marriage) and they too would be practicing polygamy (except in Saskatchewan,Canada)
Shania, Willington ALberta
03/30/10 9:07 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Um, no, sorry, Shania
First, one does NOT have to make any kind of claim in any kind of court to commit polygamy under Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada. All you have to do is to have a ceremony or to live together conjugally. Five years in prison. Zero to do with family court. Been that way since 1892, if I remember correctly. Saskatchewan has no exemption from any part of the Criminal Code. Saskatchewan has made a provision in its civil law for handling assets in polygamous arrangements. That does not exempt anybody from the federal law criminalizing such arrangements. I think you're confusing divorce law with criminal law.
J.R., Big city Quebec
03/30/10 11:47 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Saskatchewan sanctions polygamy
JR, actually, tis you who are wrong about Saskatchewan law. Civil courts deal with civil matters. Family courts deal with conjugal union/relationship matters. Saskatchewan has NOT made provisions in its civil law for handling assets of Polygamous unions. Saskatchewan has made provisions in its FAMILY courts (Family Property Act..formerly the marriage act)for assisting in the creation/authority of and forcing unilateral and binding consent upon parties to "become polygamous" in the case where maried persons alos cohabitate with unmarried persons or marry polygamously. It is a federal criminal act to assist with/ provide consent for and make binding upon persons more than one conjugal union at a time in Canada. Saskatchewan does exactly that, contrary to the Criminal code of Canada.
Shania, Willington Alberta
04/05/10 11:10 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Corrections to both on Po;lygamy in Canada
Shania, Civil law includes family courts in Canada. After researching your statement, I concude that Saskatchewan civil law of matrimonial property has prompted the civil family legislation in Saskatchewan to be interpreted by the court authorities as allowing the court to deem married persons to be capable in matrimonial law of becoming the spouse of a person who already has a spouse. However, the married person(s) would be acting criminally to assert they are also in another conjugal relationship. Anyone who authorizes, consents to, or performs in a position of binding authority to create subsequent spouses in civil law(assuming one or both of the parties have an existing valid marriage remaining in Canada or elsewhere) would be acting criminally to authorize such a union. If you are saying that Saskatchewan courts authorize, force or declare spousal unions that are simultaneous to either party being in a married state already, then that would be a criminal act of polygamy as well. If the alleged spouse of a person whom has a spouse does not consent to a conjugal (married-like, under civil legislation) union and are forced by the state to "become the spouse of a person whom has a spouse", then the state would be acting criminally. JR, living together conjugally implies that there is consent of the parties to qualify as conjugal partners in civil law.If a single person simply lives with a married person, they do not automatically become spouses as their union would be voided. If they consent to become spouses, then they would be in a polygamous union and subject to the criminal code of Canada. If however, the state declares them to be spouses during any period of time in which one or both of them is in an existing marriage or conjugal union, then the state is assisting in creating polygamous unions and therefore anyone involved in the creation of the subsequent conjugal union would be charged with criminal polygamy.
Sachin, Toronto Ontario
04/06/10 12:19 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Canadian polygamy
A Saskatchewan Court of Queens Bench Family Court Judge has said the following when assisting a married person to be the same-time spouse of another person while legally married to her other husband. "The formation of a spousal relationship is not hindered by the existence of a subsisting marriage. Mutual intention of the parties consummated by their conduct, perhaps with an expressive public component" The Saskatchewan Family Law states:under its section 51: "Rights of new spouse 51 Where a person becomes the spouse of a person who has a spouse, the rights pursuant to this Act of the subsequent spouse are subject to the rights pursuant to this Act of the prior spouse." Multiple conjugal unions are not prosecuted in that Province. The unions are made legal by the government legislation and courts.
Bert, Weyburn Saskatchewan
05/18/10 6:13 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.