Justice in the Régie du logement? IT IS A JOKE!-PART II
不出所料，在漫长等待6个星期（尽管审判长自己说“两个星期就会出结果”）之后，魁北克租房委员会还是下达了有利于房东的判决。
在这个判决的背后值得大众关注的是：
1. 尽管租房委员会的记录显示本案前后经历了两次庭审，而且，第二次庭审的审判长在开庭初始也说：“对于第一次庭审已经讨论过的内容不再赘述”。可是，判决书却华丽丽地隐去了第一次庭审存在的事实，只说庭审于第二次的开庭日举行。这仅仅是笔误吗？当然不是！后面还有详细阐述。
2. 第二次庭审的审判长在开庭初始就特别对被告下达指令：我让你说时你才能说。考虑到这是不同于正规司法审判庭的行政类裁议庭（administrative tribunal），被告谨守其嘱。原告又一次以突然袭击的方式抛出大量第一次呈堂的证据，审判长对此微笑一一颔首表示满意，最后，大大出乎被告意料的是：在整个庭审即将结束前的5分钟，审判长说：我对原告提供的证据表示信服，现在给被告5分钟的时间对原告的申诉进行抗辩。被告表示他、或者任何其他人都不可能在这样被突然袭击的情况下进行有效抗诉。对此，判决书是这样结论的：被告未能提出有效反诉。各位看官，捂上你的嘴不让你说话，然后说是你没有申辩，这就是魁北克的司法公正！
3. 尽管第二次庭审的审判长在开庭初始默认了一审的存在，但在庭讯中却拒绝被告引用一审法官的评估，而且无视原告证词的前后重大矛盾；
4. 原则上说，行政裁议庭的审判结果是可以上诉到魁省法院，但魁北克租房委员会明确否决了租金仲裁的上诉可能。被告（房客，弱势群体）只能在同一个议事庭要求撤销裁决（花费73刀），连他们的工作人员都表示这基本上是无用功，如果被拒绝，被告可以要求重议（再花费73刀），但任何一个孰知魁北克文化的人都知道：让魁北克人承认自己犯下的错误，其可能性几乎是零！
所以说，魁北克租房委员会不但从游戏规则上默许房东大玩呈堂证据的突然袭击把戏，钳制被告（房客，弱势群体）的有效抗辩权利，而且，更从体制上让房东花费73刀就可以轻松赢得官司，而被告（房客，弱势群体）花费双倍的庭审费都未见得能获得公平裁判。
5. 最卑鄙的是，他们明知这个裁决是不公正的，因为被告是华裔，所以，他们在玩弄司法的同时，用“$15.88” （要我发发）这样一个他们认为华裔会欣欣然笑纳的数字来抹杀其裁决的不公不义！
正告魁北克租房委员会：如果你们认为每一个华人都会被虚伪善意包装的不公不义收买，你错了！
To nobody’s surprise, after 6 weeks, triple of the delay the commissioner(judge in an administrative tribunal) promised, the Régie du logement of Quebec eventually rendered a decision in favor of the landlord.
Here are some things in the decision may interest the public:
1. Despite the fact that there are two hearings held on the case on different dates, despite the fact that the commissioner who presided the 2nd hearing admitted it by saying that we would not go through the first part that we did last time, the commissioner reiterated the fact to “L’audience de cette demande en fixation du loyer s’est tenue (date)/ the hearing was held on (a specific date, one day)” which is not true;
2. At the beginning of the 2nd hearing, the commissioner instructed the Defendant (tenant) to talk only if she was so allowed. Yet, to the Defendant’s surprise, it was at the very end of the hearing and even after the commissioner had already clearly expressed her satisfaction with the Plaintiff’s testifying, the commissioner gave the Defendant merely 5 minutes to contest the suspicious documents presented by the Plaintiff as an unfair surprise. The Defendant (tenant) responded that it was impossible for her or anybody to conduct an effective contest to the big quantity of documents presented as an unfair surprise. Yet, the decision reads as “la locataire omit toutefois de présenter des éléments de preuve probants et pertinents pour contrer les affirmations de la locataire/ the tenant party omitted to present compelling and relevant evidence to contest the landlord’s claims”. Wow, it reminds me of Secretary Clinton’s Benghazi testify, quote “he (Chris Stevens) knows where to pull the levers, where to go for information, where to register concerns…he understood completely that where anything he requested or anything he was questioning should be directed”, blaming the victim and wiped off her faults and responsibilities!
3. Although the commissioner seemed acknowledged the existence of the 1st hearing, she refused to take the assessment performed during the previous hearing and ignored the contradictory testimonies given by the Plaintiff;
4. Generally speaking, a decision of an administrative tribunal is subject to appeal in the Court of Quebec, but the Régie du logement denied the possibility for rent-fixing cases and exchanged it with a revocation with costs ($73) which has almost no chance to be accepted and then you may ask for review with costs ($73) which is to anybody’s common sense that it has 0 chance to let any Quebecois admit his/her own fault.
As a matter of a fact, the Regie du logement systematically allows landlords to unfairly surprise the tenants, makes it easier for landlords to win a case with a cost of $73 whereas the tenants have to pay DOUBLE to have a mere chance to seek justice!
5. They knew the decision is unfair. In this specific case of which the Defendant party is Chinese, they came up with a deliberately played number: $15.88, means “I will have fortune” in Chinese culture. Rendered an unfair decision and justified it with an illusive word, so justice in the Régie du logement!
-律政混混， IForYou, Tumblr blogger (English/Chinese) and 新浪博客博主, a voice for little people, ordinary people and minority people in Quebec, Canada!
不出所料，在漫长等待6个星期（尽管审判长自己说“两个星期就会出结果”）之后，魁北克租房委员会还是下达了有利于房东的判决。
在这个判决的背后值得大众关注的是：
1. 尽管租房委员会的记录显示本案前后经历了两次庭审，而且，第二次庭审的审判长在开庭初始也说：“对于第一次庭审已经讨论过的内容不再赘述”。可是，判决书却华丽丽地隐去了第一次庭审存在的事实，只说庭审于第二次的开庭日举行。这仅仅是笔误吗？当然不是！后面还有详细阐述。
2. 第二次庭审的审判长在开庭初始就特别对被告下达指令：我让你说时你才能说。考虑到这是不同于正规司法审判庭的行政类裁议庭（administrative tribunal），被告谨守其嘱。原告又一次以突然袭击的方式抛出大量第一次呈堂的证据，审判长对此微笑一一颔首表示满意，最后，大大出乎被告意料的是：在整个庭审即将结束前的5分钟，审判长说：我对原告提供的证据表示信服，现在给被告5分钟的时间对原告的申诉进行抗辩。被告表示他、或者任何其他人都不可能在这样被突然袭击的情况下进行有效抗诉。对此，判决书是这样结论的：被告未能提出有效反诉。各位看官，捂上你的嘴不让你说话，然后说是你没有申辩，这就是魁北克的司法公正！
3. 尽管第二次庭审的审判长在开庭初始默认了一审的存在，但在庭讯中却拒绝被告引用一审法官的评估，而且无视原告证词的前后重大矛盾；
4. 原则上说，行政裁议庭的审判结果是可以上诉到魁省法院，但魁北克租房委员会明确否决了租金仲裁的上诉可能。被告（房客，弱势群体）只能在同一个议事庭要求撤销裁决（花费73刀），连他们的工作人员都表示这基本上是无用功，如果被拒绝，被告可以要求重议（再花费73刀），但任何一个孰知魁北克文化的人都知道：让魁北克人承认自己犯下的错误，其可能性几乎是零！
所以说，魁北克租房委员会不但从游戏规则上默许房东大玩呈堂证据的突然袭击把戏，钳制被告（房客，弱势群体）的有效抗辩权利，而且，更从体制上让房东花费73刀就可以轻松赢得官司，而被告（房客，弱势群体）花费双倍的庭审费都未见得能获得公平裁判。
5. 最卑鄙的是，他们明知这个裁决是不公正的，因为被告是华裔，所以，他们在玩弄司法的同时，用“$15.88” （要我发发）这样一个他们认为华裔会欣欣然笑纳的数字来抹杀其裁决的不公不义！
正告魁北克租房委员会：如果你们认为每一个华人都会被虚伪善意包装的不公不义收买，你错了！
To nobody’s surprise, after 6 weeks, triple of the delay the commissioner(judge in an administrative tribunal) promised, the Régie du logement of Quebec eventually rendered a decision in favor of the landlord.
Here are some things in the decision may interest the public:
1. Despite the fact that there are two hearings held on the case on different dates, despite the fact that the commissioner who presided the 2nd hearing admitted it by saying that we would not go through the first part that we did last time, the commissioner reiterated the fact to “L’audience de cette demande en fixation du loyer s’est tenue (date)/ the hearing was held on (a specific date, one day)” which is not true;
2. At the beginning of the 2nd hearing, the commissioner instructed the Defendant (tenant) to talk only if she was so allowed. Yet, to the Defendant’s surprise, it was at the very end of the hearing and even after the commissioner had already clearly expressed her satisfaction with the Plaintiff’s testifying, the commissioner gave the Defendant merely 5 minutes to contest the suspicious documents presented by the Plaintiff as an unfair surprise. The Defendant (tenant) responded that it was impossible for her or anybody to conduct an effective contest to the big quantity of documents presented as an unfair surprise. Yet, the decision reads as “la locataire omit toutefois de présenter des éléments de preuve probants et pertinents pour contrer les affirmations de la locataire/ the tenant party omitted to present compelling and relevant evidence to contest the landlord’s claims”. Wow, it reminds me of Secretary Clinton’s Benghazi testify, quote “he (Chris Stevens) knows where to pull the levers, where to go for information, where to register concerns…he understood completely that where anything he requested or anything he was questioning should be directed”, blaming the victim and wiped off her faults and responsibilities!
3. Although the commissioner seemed acknowledged the existence of the 1st hearing, she refused to take the assessment performed during the previous hearing and ignored the contradictory testimonies given by the Plaintiff;
4. Generally speaking, a decision of an administrative tribunal is subject to appeal in the Court of Quebec, but the Régie du logement denied the possibility for rent-fixing cases and exchanged it with a revocation with costs ($73) which has almost no chance to be accepted and then you may ask for review with costs ($73) which is to anybody’s common sense that it has 0 chance to let any Quebecois admit his/her own fault.
As a matter of a fact, the Regie du logement systematically allows landlords to unfairly surprise the tenants, makes it easier for landlords to win a case with a cost of $73 whereas the tenants have to pay DOUBLE to have a mere chance to seek justice!
5. They knew the decision is unfair. In this specific case of which the Defendant party is Chinese, they came up with a deliberately played number: $15.88, means “I will have fortune” in Chinese culture. Rendered an unfair decision and justified it with an illusive word, so justice in the Régie du logement!
-律政混混， IForYou, Tumblr blogger (English/Chinese) and 新浪博客博主, a voice for little people, ordinary people and minority people in Quebec, Canada!
