(This post is opinion-commentary, as should be obvious.)
Have you ever noticed that every time a lawyer makes an argument for some crazy thing he always starts by saying that he doesn't want the crazy thing?
In this video, University of Ottawa's hired lawyer Lynn Harnden provides a brilliant example, at the May 2, 2011, first day of labour arbitration hearings into the wrongful dismissal case of physics professor Denis Rancourt.
Lawyering 101: "He doesn't want a publication ban on the hearings."
Just a ban until the hearings are done and a decision is rendered, two years or more say, since he agrees this is of public interest... ah humm. Oh, and he doesn't want to show his arguments as to why such an "enriched exclusion" is necessary...
This passes for reasonable arguments in the world of binding labour arbitrations in Ontario, Canada.
See another video of Lynn Harnden in action HERE.
See all UofOWatch posts about the arbitration hearings HERE.
See links and details about the arbitration hearings at academicfreedom.ca HERE.
