PRESS RELEASE: FREE TRADE WHISTLE BLOWER SHELLEY ANN CLARK UNDER ATTACK IN OTTAWA

Editor’s Note: For those who have been following or are presently interested in the ongoing controversy surrounding the North American Free Trade Agreement this news breaking story should be of prime interest.

Shelley Ann Clark desperately needs our help. Please lend your assistance to one of Canada’s foremost whistle blowers by passing this Press Release on to as many associates that you can. Let’s do our utmost to bring this story to the attention of the msm and Canadians in general.

Shelley Ann’s efforts cannot be left to die in vain along with our sovereignty.

Arthur Topham
Publisher/Editor
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″
http://www.radicalpress.com
radical@radicalpress.com

–––––––––––––––––––––––

PRESS COMMUNIQUE

TO BE RELEASED JANUARY 6, 2011

FREE TRADE WHISTLE BLOWER SHELLEY ANN CLARK UNDER ATTACK IN OTTAWA

The “mainstream” national media won’t touch her and lawyers and politicians will not sue her.

Shelley Ann Clark is the Federal Civil servant with 30 years experience who worked in the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Negotiations Office as an Executive Assistant to the third highest ranking negotiator on Mulroney’s team.
Between 1986 and 1988 Clark was ordered to falsify and eventually shred briefing papers designed to mislead provincial premiers as to what was really being given away in the Free Trade Agreement (FTA).  In March 1988 she was ordered by her boss to secretly remove key documents from the Free Trade Office to the trunk of his car.   While screening the material to be removed, Clark came across a “Step-by-Step Implementation Scheme” that would eventually lead to the merger of Canada and the U.S.A.  We are now in 2010, and even though there was no media fanfare announcing this event, IT HAS OCCURRED.  You are seeing evidence everywhere as more and more American owned businesses are moving into Canada and forcing Canadian businesses to shut down. You can see it in the privileges that American businessmen are receiving when investing in Canada. Favoritism towards American investors is in evidence. Speak to Canadians who are trying to invest and assume they will receive the same privileges as their American counterparts.  Listen to Paul Hellyer’s speech that he gave to his audience when he launched his Canadian Action Party in 1997.

In June, 1993, Clark went public with her explosive story. She ran for political office in the Federal elections.  At the invitation of Canadians she traveled across Canada as a guest speaker in order to inform Canadians that their country had been sold to the Americans.

In April, 1995, the harassment she suffered at the hands of the federal government and its agents finally took its toll and she collapsed for the first time.

After a four year absence, in the fall of 1999 she returned to the Department of Foreign Affairs.  Since then, Clark’s career went into a downward spiral.

In December, 2000, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade declared her a “surplus” employee. In January, 2001, she was offered a position at the Public Service Commission of Canada (PSC) NOT as an Executive Assistant or Administrator that are her areas of expertise, but as a data entry clerk and part-time receptionist.  Having a family to support she accepted the offer.

From January 2001 to April 2004, the PSC treated Shelley Ann in an inequitable, disrespectful, unjust and differential manner. She was ridiculed by Human Resources Managers when she brought them her Curriculum Vitae.  They laughed and told her “you are asking me to take one huge leap of faith to believe anything that you have put down in your CV”. No one at the PSC would consider her for any job that would have been commensurate with her experience and qualifications.  She was ostracized by everyone.    Staff meetings were held without including her. After each one of these staff meetings she was called in to her immediate supervisor’s office and told that the staff was complaining about her because she could not do the job.  All of these irregular activities by the PSC led to her second collapse in January of 2004.

On January 21, 2005, Shelley Ann was forced into an early retirement when the Public Service Commission would not allow her to return to the workplace on a gradual return to work program. She was even refused to take on the duties of a Receptionist who was a Temp Agency person.

On February 28, 2006, after a lengthy battle with health problems caused by the stress inflicted on her by 11 years of harassment by the Federal Government, Shelley Ann filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).

On March 6, 2008, the Canadian Human Rights Commission submitted  their Investigation Report.  The decision was made to proceed to a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) Hearing.

On September 14, 2009, a five day hearing began at Canadian the Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT). Shelley Ann, with no legal experience, stood alone and represented herself against a Federal Government Legal Team of five people.  She did not have the funds to pay for a lawyer.  Shelley Ann approached a list of lawyers from Ottawa law firms begging them to represent her on “contingency”.  They all refused.

In the Hearing Room Shelley Ann was obstructed from presenting her case at every turn, while the Department of Justice lawyers were allowed to say and do anything they wanted.

On February 3, 2010, the Chairman of the CHRT rendered his decision in favour of the federal government.
However, the Chairman did arrive at the conclusion that the Public Service Commission’s behavior towards Shelley Ann had been so outrageous that he made note of this in his report.

Here are some of the statements made by the CHRT’s Chairman, Mr. Rejean Belanger in his report “Reasons for Decision”:

•     Point # 166 – “It seems to us that this six-week period the Complainant spent alone in an empty office, that none of the witnesses, including the Chief of Human Resource Operations for the Public Service Commission, were able to explain, represents an aberrant and unimaginable situation”.

•     Point # 167 – “However, it is a neglectful and/or an unpardonable oversight by Human Resources.  Given everything we have learned about the Complainant, we are of the opinion that she certainly did not deserve to be treated in such a way.”

•     Point # 168 – “We can easily imagine the anguish and the depression that the Complainant might have felt or experienced during this extended period.  If an employer wanted to discourage or destroy an employee, there is no better way to do so.”

In February, 2010, Shelley Ann filed an application with the Federal Court to appeal the decision rendered by the CHRT.

On March 22, 2010, Shelley Ann filed her 37 page SWORN AFFIDAVIT with the Federal Court along with over 300 pages of Exhibits that she prepared without any legal assistance.

On December 14, 2010, Shelley Ann received a Court Order by e-mail signed by Chief Justice, Allan Lutfy. The Court Order states: “Point #1: This proceeding shall continue as a specially managed proceeding.”

When Shelley Ann put the question to a clerk at the Federal Court Public Counter what Point # 1 meant she was advised that the usual standard practice for persons bringing a case to the Federal Court is that they never know in advance what Judge will be assigned to their case. It’s like playing Russian Roulette.  Which Judge a person gets is not pre-determined.  It all depends on who is on duty on that particular day.  However, in Shelley Ann Clark’s case a Judge had already been pre-determined and specially assigned to her case ahead of time.

In Shelley Ann’s case, Chief Justice, Allan Lutfy has been specially assigned to be the Judge overseeing the trial.  Prothonotary, Roza Aronovitch has been assigned as the Case Management Judge.  WE ask that everyone who reads this “Proposed” Press Release goes onto their GOOGLE SEARCH ENGINE and enters the name “Alan Lutfy” as well as linking to the following website: http://www.waterwarcrimes.com/contact-us—privately.html.

These two sources will clearly demonstrate to you who Shelley Ann Clark is up against when she goes into the Federal Court Room sometime in the new year.   The information that you will read from the above-mentioned links will make it clear to you why it is imperative that Shelley Ann, at this point, needs legal representation to ensure her well being.  This lawyer must  a) be willing to take her case on contingency; b) come from outside the province of Ontario and especially Ottawa and c) have the stones to go up against Chief Justice Allan Lutfy.

Because her case is being heard in a Federal Court, a lawyer from any province can represent her. WE are appealing to everyone to help her find legal representation.

As of the date of this Press Release, January 6, 2011, the Federal Court has not yet set a date for her case to be heard.  We, who support Shelley Ann, believe that she is being denied her human rights by not having a lawyer to represent her in the court room to settle this issue once and for all. This case does not bode well for Canada whose Constitution claims to respect Human Rights and boasts that we live in a democratic nation.