Canadian Governance Reform Council

914 – 950 Drake Avenue
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada V6Z 2B9
Ph. 604.609.0520
reformcouncil.weebly.com
bradkempoesq@gmail.com

February 21, 2017

Office of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Parliament Buildings
Ottawa, Ontario

Attention: the Honourable A.G. Jody Wilson-Raybould

Dear Ma’am:

Re: Submission in Advance of Seeking Settlement Negotiation

Be advised that on November 30, 2004, Lemieux J. of the Federal Court of
Canada ordered the information about my 3 decade ordeal described herein
is national security confidential and would if disclosed cause injury to
Canada’s international relations and is therefore not ever for public
consumption.1

My dealings with attorneys general on the federal level began with this
action; at a time when your office was inhabited by Martin Cauchon and his
successor Irwin Cotler. I began political reform in the autumn of 2007;
taking receipt of this response to a comprehensive submission regarding
what this correspondence delivers to you.

1
Court File No. DES-5-03.

1
From: mcu@justice.gc.ca on behalf of Ministerial
Correspondence Unit - Mailout (mcu2@justice.gc.ca)
Sent: November-05-07 12:07:33 PM
To: bkempo@hotmail.com

Dear Mr. Kempo:

On behalf of the Honourable Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, I acknowledge receipt of your
correspondence regarding various issues. Please be assured that
your correspondence has been brought to the attention of the
Minister and examined by appropriate departmental officials.
However, I must advise you that the Minister is unable to assist
with these matters in any way. Thank you for writing.

Yours sincerely,

Maureen Murphy, Chief of Staff

In January 1993, the Canadian Security & Intelligence Service and affiliated
federal, provincial and local agencies surreptitiously removed me from the
practice of law.2 They did so knowing my mother at the time was on the
federal Bench since 1984 and my uncle was and had been a Yukon Senator
since 1975.

Inter alia, the serial criminality and Parliament-ratified human rights
violations constituted an egregious attack on the constitutional independence
of the Bar and more so because of the primary reason why they did so.

It wouldn’t be until early 2002 I discovered what it was. In September of
that year an action was commenced; and the first step the Government of
Canada took after filing its defence was to claim ‘national security’ and
‘injury to international relations’ privilege. This caused me to revisit every
suspicious experience I had since returning to Canada from law school in the

2
My curriculum vitae and my family’s bio is posted here.

2
United Kingdom in June 1987. In March 2003, I filed a 68-page Amended
Statement of Claim3 – demonstrative of the lengths taken to pursue what
violates Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights.
This is the successor to the Nuremburg Code’s prohibition on governments
conducting experiments on citizens without their knowledge and consent.

The parallel to my ordeal in Canadian history is what happened to the wife of
a sitting NDP member of Parliament in the 1960s. I quote from Anatomy of
a Public Interest Case against the CIA, Hamline Journal of Public Law and
Policy, Fall 1990:

Early in 1979 Canadian Member of Parliament David Orlikow called
our office with a horror story that bordered on the incredible. It
seemed that some twenty years earlier, David's wife, Val Orlikow,
had suffered a bout of depression following the birth of their
daughter and had sought help at the leading psychiatric hospital in
Canada -- the Allan Memorial Institute at McGill University in
Montreal. Under the "care" of the Director of the Institute, Dr. D.
Ewen Cameron, Val was subjected to a number of unorthodox
procedures in lieu of generally accepted psychotherapy. In
particular, she was given injections of LSD and was exposed to
what Dr. Cameron called "psychic driving" -- a procedure used
nowhere else in which tape-recorded messages were played
hundreds of thousands of times. Not surprisingly, these bizarre
procedures did not help Val, but made her condition worse.

It was only in the late seventies that David and Val learned for the
first time, from a New York Times story, that Cameron's work had
been subsidized by the United States Central Intelligence Agency
as part of a secret program to study techniques of brainwashing.
The Orlikows wanted to sue the CIA for its part in experiments
performed on Val by the now deceased Cameron; they insisted that

3
If prompted login is bush and password obama. A list of causes of action and
litigation history are compiled along with commentary on each step taken here.

3
there was no one else who would take their case and help them
right this wrong.

[…]

But this case involving the CIA goes far beyond the typical public
interest litigation precisely because it addresses an area of
lawbreaking where normal political and legal remedies are not
available. As the late Senator Frank Church concluded, after
leading the congressional investigation of the CIA's improper
activities in the 1950s and 1960s, that agency was "a rogue
elephant" operating outside the law and protected by a shroud of
secrecy. This is an account of that rogue elephant's reckless
experimentation upon unwitting Canadian citizens, as well as the
story of a public interest litigation against an opponent of immense
power and dubious purpose.

The parallel resides in the fact that like this wife of an MP, a R&D program
was commenced exploiting me without being aware of it. Incontestably,
those like myself with significant connections to Ottawa are not immune
from these injury causing human rights abuses of power.

Being a lawyer then for 12 years I witnessed the Court under the direction of
then Associate Chief Justice Alan Lutfy (who appointed himself case
manager) undermine the integrity of the lawsuit; making decision after
decision that were incontestably biased in favor of the government. 4 The
intent was more than obvious: insulating the culpable and protecting at all
costs the R&D program.

4
To conceal the brazen bias he appointed Lemieux J. and Prothonotary Hargrave
as joint case managers; doing so to generate plausible deniability the case was
being sabotaged. I’m sure you’re aware of the press and academic allegation the
Federal Court is one of the most plum patronage judicial appointments in
Canada. Reference my years of research finding the political practice has been
employed by both parties since before Confederation. There’s corroboration in
this Ottawa Citizen article and an academic institute’s treatment.

4
More proof of the bias was in the fact that two critical motions I filed took
not weeks or months to resolve, but years:

Hargrave P.: Costs in Advance Motion II filed March 26, 2003; heard
March 25, 2004; rendered April 20, 2005
1 year from filing to hearing
1 year, 2 months year between hearing and decision
Time Factor: 2 Years, 1 month

Lemieux J.: Privilege Motion filed December 27, 2002; In camera
(Ottawa) hearing on October 2003; rendered November 30, 2004
11 months from filing to hearing
1 year 1 month between hearing and decision
Time Factor: 2 Years

Included in this submission is a Chronology – a bullet-point autobiography
with documentation that reveals decades of abuses of power that if public
would trigger regime change.

Having an undergrad degree in political philosophy (University of Victoria
B.A., 1985), I had the requisite skills to ascertain with accuracy and
comprehensiveness after years of research what the conditions and
antecedents were that led to what I endured for decades and my sister since
the early 1990s. They are posted on the website of my academic institute
The Canadian Governance Reform Council.

In a U.S. Statement of Claim I plead my findings:

5
2.21 KEMPO’s academic research5 […] was triggered by how the
Federal Court of Canada behaved and his circumstances as pled
herein dating back to the late 1980s. He discovered a publicly
unknown authoritarian paradigm of Canadian governance
operating since the early 1970s and which had its evolutionary
roots back to the inception of Canada as a sovereign nation in
the 1860s. Where the Founding Fathers and Americans fought a
long and costly war to be rid of English imperialistic rule, their
Canadian counterparts fully embraced the Monarchy. Doing so
led to all that was repugnant to the United States of America
being fully embedded in the fabric of Canada’s political system
and administration of justice and which has festered ever since.
Extreme political nepotism and patronage since Confederation
and the Liberal Party of Canada having cumulatively governed
for three-quarters of the 20th century led to a complete
consolidation of power and wealth and what he labeled “closet
authoritarianism”. Inter alia, the … economic elite was and still
is able to project its parochial democracy-antithetical interests
and influence across every major institution of the state;
exclusively deciding who are appointed to the courts, who
attorneys general are and who comprise the country’s political
leadership on the federal, provincial and municipal levels and the
executives of law enforcement, the military and intelligence
establishments. It also had consolidated and owns all
mainstream media assets. The consequence of these multi-
generational processes is the complete loss of transparency and
accountability for criminality and abuses of power by public
servants and the ‘economic elite’. He also discovered Canada’s
Prime Minister in the 1970s, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, had
established more than friendly relations with Cuba’s then Prime
Minister Fidel Castro, who at the time was “Moscow’s man in the
Western Hemisphere”; a declared enemy of the United States of
America and NATO allies during the Cold War. Given the “closet”
paradigm of governance it made perfect sense Prime Minister

5
I completed the first stage of my academic research in the early summer of 2007
and in August commenced what would be a multi-year dissemination initiative.
Those contacted and some responses are documented here.

6
Trudeau would have a very close and adoring relationship with
his Cuban counterpart.

2.22 In addition to that bizarre foreign policy, former Prime Minister
Trudeau established the same with China’s Chairman Mao Tse-
Tung. By the end of the 1970s Canada had become a mature
base of military and intelligence operations for the Government
of China and which threatened U.S. national and economic
security interests during that period of time in world history.
Another finding, derived from a leaked joint study by the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police and Canada’s ‘spy agency’, CSIS, The
Sidewinder Report, was that the leaders of the Communist Party
of China and the country’s wealthiest nationals had been invited
beginning in the early 1970s by the Government of Canada and
the ‘economic elite’ to purchase ever larger swaths of the
economy. KEMPO labeled the relationship between the two
governments as constituting “a geo-political marriage of the
most intimate kind”. One of the consequences of the insidious
evolution to “closet authoritarianism” and the Cuba and China
relationships was the emergence of a political culture of seething
hostility for all things American – a hatred so intense it rivals
what’s observed in the Middle East.

I determined without any room for doubt Canada’s a publicly non-
transparent cauldron of domestic authoritarianism and imported serial
human rights abusing communism.6

What in significant part makes the case is the repeated use of psych wards
in this country to engage in intimidation, harassment and punitive retaliation
against political reformers.

The first instance occurred in early August 2004. Evidence was fabricated I
was stalking a local TV personality. When two members of the Vancouver

6
The entirety of my research is posted on the Canadian Governance Reform
Council website.

7
Police Department (“VPD”) attended at my residence I was advised their
instructions weren’t to arrest me; rather escort me to St. Paul’s Hospital and
have me involuntarily committed in its psychiatric facility. I convinced them
I was being framed and they believed me.

Then in January 2007 in response to academic authorship, evidence was
manufactured that led my sister, a physician & surgeon, to be involuntarily
incarcerated for three weeks. On October 1st, 2009 she was again put in a
psych ward; as was the case again in early January 2010.

In June of that year another attempt was made to house me in a psychiatric
facility. Fortunately, the duty psychiatrist believed what I said about being
railroaded with fabricated evidence.

What triggered this submission to you is what transpired the afternoon of
Wednesday last week. Computer and Internet criminality led me to try and
file a formal complaint against this country’s security services with the VPD.
I was expressly asked if I wanted a home visit. I declined; indicating I was
going to deliver all my evidence by email. Instead of behaving
professionally, it mobilized the city’s mental health division. When the
phone rang early Wednesday evening I thought it was an investigating
officer. Instead, it was “Wendy” from the division inquiring.

It didn’t end there. Realizing I was again facing authoritarianism and serial
human rights abusing communism I called and withdrew my request for an
investigation, believing that would be end of it. It wasn’t. During the 6 p.m.
hour of Saturday, February 18th, there was a knock at my apartment door. It
was a member of the VPD in the company of a mental health worker
inquiring. I was repeatedly asked to open the door for a face-to-face. I

8
refused, choosing instead to engage him in the safety of my home. After a
ten minute discussion they left. This comprised a second instance within
three days of intimidation, harassment and punitive retaliation for seeking to
file a bona fide complaint.

This egregious medical slander was preceded by what transpired in July
2015. That’s when I sought an identical police investigation. 7 Instead of the
VPD conducting itself with professionalism and integrity, the mental health
division was asked to make contact with me; showing up at my apartment
without invitation. Then too I refused to open the door.

I refer you to the following8:

Intentional misdiagnosis and naked psychiatric punishment amount
to simultaneous violations of human rights and breaches of medical
ethics.

[…]

Beginning in the early 1970s reports began to reach the West that
political and religious dissidents were being incarcerated in
maximum-security psychiatric hospitals in the Soviet Union without
medical justification.

[…]

The pattern of abuse that has been revealed was too pervasive to
be attributable to a few corrupt doctors.

[…]

7
July 21st and 28th (File# VA15 – 128135).
8
And to what’s documented at page 12 – 13 of the Chronology.

9
[A]buse was undoubtedly attributable to intentional misdiagnosis
and to knowing complicity by individual psychiatrists in an officially
directed effort to repress dissident behavior.

[…]

I am persuaded by Munro’s account that many of these offenders
[in China] are not mentally ill according to generally accepted
international diagnostic standards.”

Source: Political Abuse of Psychiatry in the Soviet Union and in
China: Complexities and Controversies, Richard J. Bonnie, LLB, J
American Academy Psychiatry Law, 2002

----------------------------

“The fact that the use of psychiatry for political purposes is
reported from so many diverse countries reveals an on-going
tension between politics and psychiatry, and also that using
psychiatry to stifle opponents or solve conflicts appeals not only to
dictatorial regimes but to well-established democratic societies.

[…]

[It] is important to note that in the case of Soviet psychiatric
abuse, as well as in cases like the systematic abuse of psychiatry in
the People’s Republic of China, … people are hospitalized because
they are considered bothersome to the authorities because of their
constant complaints.”

Source: Psychiatry as a Tool for Coercion in Post-Soviet Countries,
European Parliament's Directorate-General for External Policies of
the Union, 2013

----------------------------

It can be politically convenient to incarcerate political opponents in
a psychiatric hospital. It saves any potential political embarrass-

10
ment that a judicial trial may present. It also undermine the
credibility of opponents by labelling them with the stigma of being
mentally insane.

[…]

“We are painfully aware: Psychiatry in some states of the
international community is often used to subvert the political and
legal guarantees of the freedom of the individual and to violate
seriously his human and legal rights.

Admission to a psychiatric hospital in many countries deprives the
dissident of the opportunity to utilise legal recourse to their
detention. … If a psychiatric diagnosis is attached to a dissenter, it
can lead to a level of doubt as to the rationality of his/her political
or social views.”

Source: Editorial: Political Abuse of Psychiatry in Authoritarian
Systems, Cambridge University

In the 1970s Canada was considered by the U.S. and NATO members to be a
moderate national security concern. That ended when the Soviet Union
collapsed. However, since the early 2000s, China’s been on an indisputable
trajectory to economic and military superpower status by mid-century;
making “triangle operators” an acute national security threat.9

You can’t read the Chronology and the rest of what’s being submitted to
your office in their entirety, including my Malfeasance Quantum Calculator10
and Photographic Evidence11, and conclude I and my sister are living in a

9
In my research I coined the label “Ottawa-Toronto-Montreal-(Beijing) triangle of
power and wealth”.
10
The quantum identified therein is what will be argued before the Court as
reasonable compensatory, aggravated and punitive damages. I’ll also submit
evidence of many hundreds of thousands of Criminal Code violations since spring
2003.
11
I’m also forwarding to your office a 5 month excerpt from my diary.

11
democracy. While virtually every Canadian does, we as a direct result of our
mother and uncle’s professional successes were sucked into the vortex that
is a chronically, nay pathetically and grotesquely, dysfunctional Ottawa.

Since September 2002 I’ve tried to get justice for her and I and help
institutionally reform government.12 That process will continue until there is
meaningful and lasting change.

It’s quite likely you and your due diligence staff will view this comprehensive
disclosure as beyond possible. And that’s totally understandable; because
you’ve all been educated and socialized into believe Canada’s parliamentary
system, the courts and law enforcement are, minus nominal abnormalities,
mature, respectable and function as expected. Problem is that’s a carefully
manufactured façade. The role of political scientists and reform minded
lawyers is to pierce it and expose what generates a false, a very carefully
trans-generationally fabricated, nation-wide perception. I did just that
experientially, through the litigation and by way of my extensive research.

The circumstances of my life are now such that soon I’ll be in a very
advantageous position, financial and otherwise, to retain a law firm to
conduct settlement negotiations; and if that doesn’t result in a satisfactory
outcome commence litigation and vigorously prosecute it to judgment.
When counsel is provided a substantial retainer I will have already have
been in receipt of evidence collected by a very close and reform-and-
accountability-committed associate since 2003 that proves the Canadian
government’s criminal and civil liability and those in the public sector who
are conspiratorially responsible for my ordeal and my sister’s troubles.

12
I authored an 85-page compilation of all the initiatives I launched to procure
reform and accountability.

12
While Res Judicata prevents me from pursuing the 2002-pled causes of
action (listed here13), the statute of limitation’s principle on discoverability
allows me to pursue those who acted in criminal concert against me.

Further, be advised two suits will be filed. The second one will be against
those in government responsible for my ordeal personally.14 The argument
that’ll be made will be pursuant to the principles of vicarious liability. None
of them, past and present, had in their scope of employment the serial
criminality and human rights violations I endured since the late 1980s and,
additionally, compiled in the Malfeasance Quantum Calculator.15 They will be
sued jointly and severally to ensure each and every one of them live the rest
of their days in abject poverty. This is a rational outcome since they
compelled my sister and I into perpetual and inescapable impecuniosity
measured in decades. If left alone we would have enjoyed extraordinary
professional success and all that it delivers in terms of having families,
buying a house, acquiring retirement wealth, taking vacations, generating
social and professional circles, pursuing hobbies and interests, etc..

I conclude with what will also be pled. While it wasn’t in the Federal Court’s
Amended Statement of Claim and thus the statute of limitation applies, the
argument will be made that the Government of Canada conspired with until
recently unknown public and private sector individuals to sabotage my first
business venture in the late 1980s.

I again quote from my U.S. federal court pleadings:

13
If prompted, the login is bush and password obama.
14
These include prime ministers back to Mulroney, cabinet ministers, the heads of
CSIS and the RCMP and the armed forces leadership back to the late 1980s.
15
The government’s civil exposure derives from the fact they used the State’s
assets, resources and technologies.

13
2.01 Prior to qualifying to become an attorney he pursued an
entrepreneurial opportunity in the computer animation industry.
In 1988 he incorporated an Alberta company, Intelligent Images
Research Inc., and was President, Chief Executive Officer and a
major shareholder. There was a very high probability of
enormous financial success in this venture because (1) the
industry was in its infancy and (2) he had recruited three world
class supercomputer experts, including the architect of the
paradigm-shifting, Pentagon prototype purchased Myrias
supercomputer, Colin Broughton, another similarly brilliant
computer scientist employed at Los Alamos National Laboratory
in New Mexico, and a British national of the same caliber to write
code (software) so the company could produce computer
generated imagery product for television productions and
advertisements, movies, music videos, computer aided design
for science, medicine, chemistry, manufacturing, engineering,
architecture, mechanics, forensic and collision reconstruction,
education tools and artwork etc.. KEMPO’s predictions of
extraordinary financial success proved accurate. In or around
August 2002 a leading industry publication reported an
estimated worldwide revenue generation of $440 billion in
hardware and software sales and production.

[…]

2.04 In order to perpetuate the R&D program, Intelligent Images
Research Inc.’s venture was clandestinely sabotaged by the
Government of Canada and the Government of China. Unaware
of this civil unlawfulness, KEMPO abandoned the venture and in
April 1989 began the process of fulfilling the requirements to
become an attorney.

The government interference that led to this venture failing constitute the
torts of interference with contractual and economic relations. The
evidentiary guide to establishing quantum, as will be argued before the trial
judge, is Steve Jobs.

14
Again, State resources on the federal and provincial levels were mobilized to
deny me this multi-billion dollar financial trajectory.

While your three predecessors did everything within their power and
authority to insulate the culpable, as did Lutfy et al., I and my reform and
accountability colleagues trust you will at minimum afford us the courtesy of
holding a meaningful and productive settlement negotiation.

Best regards,

Brad Kempo Esq.

15