print this page

HAMILTON SPECTATOR, 10 Dec, 2009 - The Investment Canada Act is neither vague nor ambiguous, and U.S. Steel's legal challenge against it should be dismissed, the government says in new court filings.

The Canadian government is suing U.S. Steel for violating job and production commitments it made under the act when it bought the former Stelco. The Pittsburgh steelmaker has responded by challenging the law, saying it is unconstitutional, and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by infringing on the firm's right to a fair hearing and presumption of innocence.

In its latest filing, the government argues the charter does not apply to the case.

The process in question is regulatory, not criminal, and is designed to enforce legislation in the national economic interest rather than punish a wrong done to society, it says.

It "bears none of the hallmarks" of a criminal process such as an arrest, no one has been charged and no criminal record will result from the proceedings, the government adds.

And, unlike in a criminal case, penalties can be avoided if a company justifies why it has not lived up to its undertakings or changes course and remedies the situation.

"A non-Canadian investor in this situation is not being called to account to society for a crime violating the public interest," the filing states. "Rather, the investor is being called to account to the Minister for failing to live up to its commitments under the (act)."

The government also disputes U.S. Steel's claim the act violates the Canadian Bill of Rights by allowing for "interference with the enjoyment of property" without due process of the law.

That right belongs to individuals, not corporations, the government says. A company may be deprived of its property rights as long as the procedure is fair.

To read the full article, click here