When Omission Becomes Design: Bureaucratic Silence as Narrative Violence

By Luc Lelièvre

In early 2020, as global institutions pivoted to enforce biomedical mandates, a chilling transformation unfolded within educational and legal systems. Universities, once heralded as bastions of critical inquiry, mandated experimental injections for students, tethering access to education to compliance with a nascent bio-security state. This was not mere policy adaptation; it was a deliberate alignment with authoritarian control, where dissent was recast as heresy. As Luc Lelièvre articulates in Heresy, his confrontation with Quebec’s legal aid system revealed a parallel dynamic: a citizen’s rigorous constitutional claim, grounded in documented discrimination, was met with bureaucratic silence. The Commission des services juridiques, tasked with upholding justice, declared, “We will no longer acknowledge or respond to future communications.” Such omission, as Lelièvre’s case illustrates, is not neutral—it is a calculated design to insulate institutions from accountability, a tactic historically refined to preserve systemic stability over ethical duty.

This pattern of narrative insulation, where uncomfortable truths are erased through non-engagement, echoes across Lelièvre’s broader critique in The Institutional Suppression of a Citizen’s Truth. There, he exposes how legal and academic bodies flatten complex constitutional arguments into trivial disputes, dismissing disability status and misrepresenting federal remedies as academic quibbles, thus engineering a procedural vanishing act to neutralize a citizen who knew too much. Since 2020, educational institutions have mirrored this betrayal, transforming from spaces of intellectual freedom into instruments of mass compliance, demanding conformity to biomedical edicts while stifling sovereign thought. Lelièvre’s meticulous archiving of bureaucratic evasion, detailed in the following case study, serves as both resistance and revelation, exposing silence not as absence but as complicity in an era where institutions prioritize control over conscience.

With thanks to Luc Lelièvre.

Introduction: The Citizen Who Knew Too Much

In France, retired surgeon Joël Le Scouarnec faced trial for the sexual assault and rape of nearly 300 children. His crimes, spanning decades, were meticulously documented—not by investigators, but by the perpetrator himself. Equally disturbing was the institutional silence: medical officials knew, some attempted to sound the alarm, yet the system remained inactive. The justification was structural: “We needed surgeons.” In this case, institutional necessity eclipsed ethical duty.

A structurally similar situation unfolded in Quebec, where a legal institution, confronted with a citizen’s rigorous constitutional claim and documented discrimination, opted not to respond to the facts. Instead, it systematically sealed itself off from further dialogue. The claim was not weak but too strong. The complaint was not unclear but too disruptive to bureaucratic stability.

Just as in the Le Scouarnec case, the most revealing aspect was not what was said but what was omitted. When omission becomes a deliberate design, silence ceases to be neutral—it becomes complicity.

Case Study: The Bureaucratic Disqualification of Luc Lelièvre

The author submitted a constitutionally grounded legal request to Quebec's legal aid network, seeking remedy for the obstruction of a federal legal proceeding involving Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter (freedom of academic expression). The case centered on an administrative actor—a legal aid lawyer—who misrepresented its nature, equating it to a simple academic grade dispute. This was not merely a juridical error; the misrepresentation was compounded by discriminatory language regarding the author’s age and disability.

When brought to the attention of the Commission des services juridiques (CSJ) and later the Protecteur du citoyen, the response was uniformly one of procedural disengagement. The Protecteur acknowledged receipt of the documentation, totaling between 65 and 120 pages, yet declared that it would no longer respond to future communications on the matter.

"We will no longer acknowledge or respond to future communications regarding the CSJ and regional legal aid offices."

No engagement with the facts. No institutional reflection. No public accountability. Just an administrative disappearing act.

Narrative Insulation: When Silence Serves the Machine

This is not merely bureaucratic passivity. It is what might be termed narrative insulation—the institutional tactic of neutralizing uncomfortable facts, not through denial, but through omission. It is the perfected form of non-engagement.

As Bandura theorized in his work on moral disengagement, institutions develop defensive habits to shield themselves from ethical discomfort. In this case, disengagement manifests through the flattening of complexity, the erasure of nuance, and the discarding of legitimate citizen critique as “out of scope.”

When a constitutional argument is reframed as an academic complaint, when a recognized disability status is ignored, when a discriminatory statement is treated as administratively irrelevant—this is not oversight. It is policy by omission.

When Absence Becomes Evidence

The most telling detail is not what is included, but what is missing:

• No legal counterargument.

• No response to documented discrimination.

• No review of the misrepresentation by the legal aid lawyer.

• No recognition of the irreversible loss of a federal remedy.

The CSJ’s handling of this case signals several red flags:

• A summary dismissal that reduced a constitutional rights complaint to a mere academic dispute.

• The mechanical invocation of "very low chances of success," unsupported by jurisprudence.

• A flawed jurisdictional argument mischaracterizing the complaint as targeting a private institution, despite its federal implications.

• The omission of all reference to the complainant’s recognized disability status.

• The insertion of irrelevant academic performance metrics, seemingly intended to discredit the claimant.

• A lack of substantive legal analysis, despite the detailed documentation provided.

Repeated and deliberate omissions become part of the institutional design.

This is where a citizen becomes an archivist. Faced with institutional closure, he preserves records, exposes distortions, and reveals how silence itself becomes complicity.

Strategic Context: Why a Legal Victory Remains Possible

Recent judicial victories in Canada demonstrate that, despite institutional obstructions, some courts remain independent and rooted in legal principles. This suggests that a Small Claims Court claim could receive an honest hearing—provided the judge applies legal reasoning and Charter-based precedent.

Strengths of the case:

• Robust evidence and procedural lock-in → The file is structured to resist dismissal on technicalities, forcing a substantive review.

• Favorable jurisprudence and Charter protections → Recent rulings affirm that fundamental rights can still prevail over administrative obstruction.

• Tactical pressure and legal coherence → The framework of the claim compels judicial scrutiny of each allegation.

• Public transparency factor → Exposure of the case may exert pressure on the judiciary to uphold constitutional standards.

---

Five Major Judicial Victories

Judicial Victories in 2025: Resistance Through Law

Encouragingly, recent court victories in Canada demonstrate that legal resistance can roll back authoritarian overreach and defend fundamental freedoms, even in tense political climates. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) reported several landmark wins in early 2025:

1. Acquittal of Trucker Harold Jonker (Freedom Convoy)
   Accused of mischief and intimidation for participating in peaceful protests against Covid mandates, Jonker was acquitted by the Ontario Superior Court after a brief three-day trial. The court found that his actions were lawful and constitutionally protected.

2. Restoration of Free Expression on Public Billboards
   Retired tradesman George Katerberg successfully challenged Ontario's order to remove a billboard critical of vaccine policies. The Ministry reversed its decision, acknowledging that public criticism of officials is protected by the Charter.

3. Overturning Ontario's Outdoor Gathering Ban
   Former MPP Randy Hillier contested tickets received for attending peaceful outdoor protests. The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the blanket ban on outdoor assembly during lockdowns violated the Charter’s guarantees.

4. Nova Scotia Ruling: Offense Does Not Equal Discrimination
   The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia dismissed a complaint against a professor accused of offending a student. The court emphasized that freedom of expression includes controversial or uncomfortable views.

5. Charges Dropped Against Toronto Street Preacher
   Jeffrey Sapocinik was charged for criticizing Santa Claus at a public parade. Prosecutors withdrew the case, conceding that public religious expression is constitutionally protected.

Why These Rulings Matter

• They establish legal precedents reinforcing civil liberties.

• They demonstrate that legal resistance remains effective.

• They affirm that constitutional rights persist even in times of crisis.

Moreover, these victories create enduring ripple effects:

Legal and Social Impacts of Judicial Victories

1. Creation of Legal Precedents

   • Each favorable ruling strengthens the body of jurisprudence protecting fundamental rights.

   • Courts increasingly rely on recent decisions when interpreting similar cases, reinforcing protections against excessive government authority.

2. Influence on Legislation and Public Policy

   • Successful legal challenges can prompt legislators to amend or repeal unconstitutional laws.

   • Governments become more cautious before enacting questionable regulations, knowing they could be overturned.

3. Shifts in Judicial and Administrative Culture

   • Judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement may become more attentive to civil rights considerations, informed by recent appellate guidance.

   • These outcomes empower citizens to challenge unjust measures, reinforcing trust in legal avenues.

4. Civic Mobilization and Cultural Transformation

   • Just as judicial wins helped catalyze social change in other countries, such as abortion rights in Argentina, these Canadian decisions can inspire new waves of activism and legal consciousness.

   • As the judiciary affirms rights, society develops stronger expectations of legal fairness and limits on bureaucratic overreach.

Conclusion: The Essay as Courtroom

Judicial victories do more than resolve individual cases. They shape the future interpretation and enforcement of law, reinforce the rule of law, and energize civic engagement. Each win helps pave the way for a more just, rights-respecting society.

This piece is not an appeal for sympathy. It is a public deposition—a documented record of how a bureaucracy, when faced with a citizen who cannot be dismissed or diminished, chooses instead to withdraw.

To write is to resist, to expose, and to construct the archive that institutions refuse to acknowledge.

My case is a meticulous exposure of bureaucratic evasion!

I appreciate you being here.

If you've found the content interesting, useful and maybe even helpful, please consider supporting it through a small paid subscription. While 99% of everything here is free, your paid subscription is important as it helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. It also helps keep it free for those that cannot afford to pay.

Please make full use of the Free Libraries.

Unbekoming Interview Library: Great interviews across a spectrum of important topics.

Unbekoming Book Summary Library: Concise summaries of important books.

Stories

I'm always in search of good stories, people with valuable expertise and helpful books. Please don't hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com

Baseline Human Health

Watch and share this profound 21-minute video to understand and appreciate what health looks like without vaccination.