The Liberal Party candidate for Edmonton-Mill Woods-Beaumont, Farhan Chak, has some serious problems on his hands. A history of controversial views on terrorism and several serious firearms charges have called into question his suitability for elected office.
Chak has not given up, though. While not denying the substance of the charges against him, he is making the argument that they are not relevant. Moreover, he is planning to sue, saying that the criminal charges were dropped:
Farhan Mujahid Chak's fledgling political career teeters on the edge after inflammatory statements attributed to the Edmonton federal Liberal candidate and an alleged brush with the law surfaced Friday.
Conservative political bloggers and the National Post newspaper carried snippets purportedly written by Chak before the 33-year-old won the Liberal nomination in the riding of Edmonton-Mill Woods-Beaumont on March 31.
Some of the writings blame the Israeli government for slaughtering, raping and enslaving Palestinians, and suggesting the West masterminded terrorist attacks to discredit Muslims.
It also came to light that Chak was arrested in 1993 in connection with the firing of a shotgun into the door of a south-side nightclub.
Chak stressed he has no criminal record.
"The charge that (the National Post) relates to is one of mistaken identity and I was fully exonerated in the law courts."
Chak said he is seeking a lawyer to pursue a complaint of defamation against the National Post.
The problem for Chak is that even if the charges were dropped, it doesn't matter. Liberal Party officials were clearly not aware of this history:
Adam Campbell, president of the federal Liberals in Alberta, said it's up to candidates to disclose anything in their past that might become an issue during campaigning. A routine RCMP check turned up no record of criminal convictions, he added.
"I was obviously very disappointed to read what was in there today," Campbell said.
Of course they were surprised. If Chak had been forthcoming, it's a safe bet he would never have been allowed run for the nomination.
And there's the rub. The application form for Liberal Party candidates is absolutely clear that all these things must be disclosed, including criminal charges even if they were ultimately dropped. Campbell's reaction suggests that Chak did not disclose as completely as he should have:
1.l Publications
Have you ever written anything that has been published or widely distributed through the Internet or other means? Without limiting the breadth of this question, this includes academic or professional papers, books or textbooks, newsletters, newspaper reports, “op-ed” pieces, columns, letters to the editor, magazine articles, short stories, novels or other fiction. If so, copies of all such writings must be provided herewith or, if the volume of your writing or other obstacles make that impractical, ten representative samples must be provided (extracts from a book will suffice if a copy is not readily available) along with a comprehensive list of all such publications.
Sounds like they were all broadsided by Chak's extensive book review.
And of course, regardless of whether it was a case of mistaken identity when Chak was accused of firing a shotgun into a club, Chak had an obligation to tell the Liberal Party of the incident, since apparently charges were filed:
4.a Past convictions involving other contraventions or criminal offences
Have you ever been charged in Canada or elsewhere, with any crime, offence or delinquency under a statute or ordinance? If yes, please provide full particulars (use a separate sheet if needed), including applicable dates, places, nature of acts or offences, penalties and pardons.
And then there is the motherhood statement:
9.0 Full disclosure
Are you aware of any other material fact not otherwise disclosed in this Form that, if publicly known, could cause your electoral chances or the electoral chances of the Liberal Party of Canada to be materially worsened, could hinder the performance of your public duties as a Member of Parliament or could be used by your opponents against you or the Liberal Party of Canada?
It would seem that Chak did not disclose any of this relevant material to the Liberal Party. Clearly that puts his nomination, and his deposit, in jeopardy. And as for revealing all this material from his past, by running for office, he put himself in a position in which all these things are relevant. If nothing else, the Liberal Party nominee application form makes his past relevant. If he did not want to make his past a subject of discussion, either with the Liberal Party or with the public at large, he should have handed back the form, unfilled, and pursued a different means of helping the Liberal Party.
Public office is, well, vey public. The Liberal Party understands this. For some reason, Farhan Chak doesn't seem to get it.
Check out other entries from the Farhan Chak category
Results will open in a new window.
Check out what Canadian bloggers have written about Farhan Chak
Results will open in a new window.
