HOME  DISINFORMATION  CHRC  PEOPLE  ABELLA  COTLER  FARBER  MARTIN  MORGAN  RAMBAM  RONEN

Four questions concerning the Disclosure Package
Lubomyr Prytulak to Giacomo Vigna   05-Dec-2005

A lawyer has a duty to be on guard against becoming the tool or dupe of an unscrupulous client or of persons associated with such a client and, in some circumstances, may have a duty to make inquiries. Law Society of British Columbia, Professional Conduct Handbook

  05 December 2005

Giacomo Vigna, Legal Counsel
Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC)
344 Slater Street
Ottawa ON    K1A 1E1


RE:  CHRC File 20031527, Canadian Jewish Congress v Lubomyr Prytulak (CJC v Prytulak)

ATTENTION:  The instant 05-Dec-2005 correspondence is for the purpose of further evaluating the question of whether the Mary M Gusella request that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) inquire into the case of CJC v Prytulak was fraudulent and is therefore void, and the related question of whether Mary M Gusella malevolence toward Lubomyr Prytulak continues to express itself in her desiring CHRC participation in CHRT proceedings for the purpose of joining with the CJC to suppress the disclosures that have been published on UKAR concerning the misconduct of both the CHRC and the CJC.



Giacomo Vigna:

The covering letter of the "Disclosure Package" which I received from the CHRC on 01-Dec-2005 prompts four questions.

QUESTION 1:  DOES GIACOMO VIGNA TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CHRC DISCLOSURE PACKAGE?

It was you who represented the CHRC in the telephone conference of 10-Nov-2005 where you undertook to supply parties with the CHRC Disclosure Package, and it was you who applied for an extension of time to supply that Disclosure Package in your letter to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) of 22-Nov-2005, and it is you to whom the CHRT addressed itself in its letters of 14-Nov-2005 and 23-Nov-2005.

The Disclosure Package which I received from the CHRC on 01-Dec-2005, in startling contrast, distinguishes you by your absence.  The covering letter is signed not by yourself, but only by a "Branch Paralegal" whose name I do not recognize Angela Justason.  Angela Justason does not identify herself as being your assistant or your representative, and does not hint at any connection to you.  Among the many papers in the Disclosure Package, your signature is nowhere to be found.  Your name is not on the return address on the envelope.

Would you be so good, then, as to state that you the CHRC representative on the matter of CJC v Prytulak do take responsibility for the Disclosure Package, and that you do vouch for its fidelity?

QUESTION 2:  DOES GIACOMO VIGNA DECLARE THAT NO SCHEDULE B EXISTS?

The 30-Nov-2005 Justason covering letter appears to have been written by someone who disclaims knowledge of whether a Schedule B exists, and for that reason is unable to deny its existence, but merely offers me a rule by which I will be able to answer that question for myself:

Schedule "B" includes all documents in the possession of the Canadian Human Rights Commission over which the Commission claims privilege.  If Schedule "B" is absent from this disclosure package, it is because the Commission has no such documentation in its possession.

I wonder, though, if it would be possible for you to add to the above your own statement that is a little less noncommittal?  That is, would you be able to declare flat out, without equivocation or circumlocution, that over the more than two years of CJC v Prytulak proceedings, not a single privileged document has been created, which is why no Schedule B exists?

QUESTION 3:  HAS GIACOMO VIGNA PERFORMED ELEMENTARY VERIFICATIONS TO DETERMINE WHETHER HIS CLIENT CONTINUES DOCUMENT SPOLIATION?

I have already brought to your attention a lawyer's obligation to avoid becoming the tool or dupe of an unscrupulous client:

A lawyer has a duty to be on guard against becoming the tool or dupe of an unscrupulous client or of persons associated with such a client and, in some circumstances, may have a duty to make inquiries.


Professional Conduct Handbook, The Law Society of British Columbia, January, 1993, Chapter 4: Avoiding Questionable Conduct, Including Improper Communications, p. 10.1, Footnote 3.

The obligation to "make inquiries" lies particularly heavy in the circumstance that verification of client integrity is simple and straightforward, as in the instant case where the documents furnished by your client can easily be tested for completeness by comparing them to for starters the "CJC V UKAR Key Documents" list at www.ukar.org/chrc/outline.html, and after that comparing them also to the lists of documents which I complain have been spoliated, as in my 27-May-2004 letter to Mary M Gusella titled Lubomyr Prytulak Reply to CHRC Hannya Rizk Investigator's Report at www.ukar.org/chrc/gusell07.html.

Would you be able to declare, then, that you have taken this elementary step to verify that your client is not unscrupulous, and has not begun to use you as a tool or dupe?

QUESTION 4:  HAS GIACOMO VIGNA GIVEN FAIR CONSIDERATION TO A LAWYER'S DUTY TO WITHDRAW?

In case at least one of your answers is that you decline to take responsibility for the Disclosure Package, or that you decline to affirm the nonexistence of a Schedule B, or that you have neglected to perform the elementary verification of client integrity recommended above, will you be able to declare that you have given sufficient consideration to your obligation to withdraw from representing the CHRC in the matter of CJC v Prytulak?

Duty to withdraw
7.  

Where a client wishes to adopt a course prohibited by this Chapter, the lawyer shall do everything reasonably possible to prevent it.

8.  

Where the client, notwithstanding the lawyer's actions under Rule 7, does anything prohibited by this Chapter the lawyer shall  [...]  withdraw from representing the client in that matter.


Professional Conduct Handbook, The Law Society of British Columbia, January, 1993, Chapter 8: The Lawyer as Advocate, p. 22.



Lubomyr Prytulak

cc:

Irving ABELLA, National Honourary President, CJC, Department of History, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto ON  M3J 1P3
Hon Irwin COTLER, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, 284 Wellington Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 0H8
Phillip CRAWLEY, Publisher and CEO, The Globe and Mail, 444 Front Street West, Toronto ON  M5V 2S9
Mark J FREIMAN, CJC lawyer, McCarthy Tetrault, Suite 4700, Toronto Dominion Tower, Toronto ON  M5K 1E6
Mary M GUSELLA, Chief Commissioner, CHRC, 344 Slater Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 1E1
Rt Hon Paul MARTIN, Prime Minister, Office of the Prime Minister, 80 Wellington Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 0A2
Ed MORGAN, CJC National President, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 84 Queen's Park, Toronto ON  M5S 2C5
J Grant SINCLAIR, Chairperson CHRT, Suite A100, Floor 11, 160 Elgin Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 1J4



HOME  DISINFORMATION  CHRC  PEOPLE  ABELLA  COTLER  FARBER  MARTIN  MORGAN  RAMBAM  RONEN