There’s a great editorial at the National Review Online site regarding the Mark Steyn case in Canada, in which he is being tried by a kangaroo court for expressing his opinion. (His article argued that demographic trends indicate that Western Civilization will sooner or later be forced to confront problems associated with radical Islam.)
The NRO piece tells us of the tragi-comical nature of this Soviet-style proceeding:
[The] proceedings had no evidentiary rules — new evidence was routinely introduced without warning. Commissioners routinely recessed to determine the eligibility of evidence; legal representation would dash off mid-hearing to print Internet material to introduce as evidence; an “expert” witness was called whose chief credentials were academic papers on Buffy the Vampire Slayer; and still other witnesses were called under the prejudicial direction that “we anticipate that success in this case will provide the impetus for prohibiting discriminatory publications in the other provinces.”
That is what passes for justice in Canada these days.