原告Rosemarie Surakka于2011年提出为女儿Lisa Dudley追诉的讼案，联邦政府法律团提出反诉，认为杜德利人已死亡，她的宪法保障权力也自然消失。
但卑诗高院承审法官Heather Holmes判示，苏卡拉的诉请符合加拿大法律和国际人权法最新发展的理性原则，驳回联邦政府的反诉案。
荷姆斯指出，这项判决只是针对法源的解释，原则上支持原告为死者提诉争取应有的权利，但不表示讼案开审得以成案。
苏卡拉的律师和法律界专家指出，这个判例已经成为宪法解释的一个重要里程碑。
人虽亡故，但被判仍有权利提出诉讼的丽莎杜德利，于2008年9月和男友在米臣市郊宅中遭人枪击。男友当场死亡，杜女重伤仍有意识，邻居打911报警後，警员两度开警车到现场，但只短暂巡视屋外情况，从未下车就驶离现场。
37岁的杜德利躺在血泊中4天之後才被邻人发现，在送医院途中不治 。涉及该枪击案的三凶嫌已被逮捕，一人认罪。
但是妈妈苏拉卡坚持为女儿伸冤，她认为皇家骑警没有尽责查案，失去援助丽莎的黄金时间，因此决定为女儿控告骑警失职。
当时被派往米臣枪击案民宅的其中一名执勤骑警，事後被罚扣一天薪水，和接受一封申戒信。
# B.C. mother wins fight over slain daughter's charter rights
The Supreme Court of British Columbia says a grieving mother who blames the federal and provincial governments for violating the charter rights of her slain daughter can move forward on a lawsuit
“My heart is still beating so hard in my chest — I'm still looking at these papers. I just can't believe it's for real sometimes,” Rosemarie Surakka, whose 37-year-old daughter Lisa Dudley was gunned down in her Mission, B.C., neighbourhood in 2008, told CBC.
“Today I'm telling you we're just going to rejoice and be grateful to those who are helping right a wrong done to Lisa."
The ruling by B.C. Supreme Court Justice Heather Holmes stems from a lawsuit filed by Surakka.
RCMP were called to the scene by a neighbour who heard the gunshots, but the officer never got out of his car, reporting later that everything looked normal in the area.
Dudley was paralyzed and clung to life for four days in the house until a neighbour stumbled on the scene. She died before reaching the hospital. Dudley’s boyfriend was killed instantly in the same attack.
Jack Woodruff, 53, pleaded guilty in the deaths last year and was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. Two other suspects are in custody and awaiting trial.
The officer in question was later found guilty of disgraceful conduct and docked a day's pay.
Surakka alleges the provincial and federal governments — in their responsibility for the RCMP — failed to uphold her daughter’s rights under Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the right to life, liberty and security of the person.
Grieving mom fights Ottawa over lawsuit for slain daughter
The case drew attention when the federal government moved to have it thrown out, arguing no one, not even a grieving mother, can make a charter case on someone else’s behalf. The government also argued a person’s charter rights end upon death.
But in her ruling, Holmes suggested the law may need updating when a charter violation is fatal.
The ruling may yet be overturned but, for now, Surakka's lawyer says the case has cleared a major hurdle.
"To my knowledge that's the first time a claim of this sort has survived a motion to strike,” said Monique Pongracic-Speier.
Andrew Lokan, a Toronto lawyer and adjunct professor of constitutional law at Osgoode Hall law school, agrees the decision is significant. If allowed to stand, it changes the general rule that one must be alive to assert charter rights.
"For me it's very important that every constitutional wrong should have a constitutional remedy, and that's the logic that was accepted in this case,” said Lokan.
But Lokan expects Ottawa will appeal the decision, because as it stands, it will open the door to more charter claims on behalf of people who have died.
No one from the federal Justice Department could be reached for comment.
'It's very important that every constitutional wrong should have a constitutional remedy.'—Andrew Lokan, Osgoode Hall law school in Toronto.
# Lisa Dudley RCMP Lawsuit: Mother To Sue On Behalf Of Slain Daughter.
VANCOUVER - A woman who alleges RCMP officers in British Columbia failed to properly investigate a shooting that led to her daughter's death has been given the green light to sue the police force after a judge rejected the federal government's argument that Lisa Dudley's charter rights died when she did.
Rosemarie Surakka launched the charter case on behalf of Dudley, her 37-year-old daughter, who died in September 2008.
Surakka's lawyer, Monique Pongracic-Speier, said it's the first case she's aware of in which a judge has allowed a charter lawsuit to go ahead once someone is dead.
"The law generally does recognize that a right without a remedy is futile," Pongracic-Speier said in an interview.
Dudley was home with her partner, 33-year-old Guthrie McKay, in a semi-rural area of Mission, east of Vancouver, when both were shot, leaving McKay dead and Dudley paralyzed.
A neighbour called 911 to report that he and another resident heard six gunshots followed by what sounded like crashing and yelling, according to Surakka's lawsuit. The neighbour also told the 911 operator where in the neighbourhood he believed the sound came from.
But when RCMP officers responded in two separate cars, they drove around the area for a short time and left, without getting out of their vehicles to investigate the reported shooting or talk to the neighbours who called 911, the lawsuit says.
Dudley was found by a neighbour four days later, still alive and conscious, but she died on the way to hospital. Three people were subsequently charged in the shooting, including one who has pleaded guilty.
Surakka filed her lawsuit in the fall of 2011, but Ottawa sought to have the case thrown out. The government argued that because Dudley is dead, she no longer has any charter rights and no one can launch a charter challenge on her behalf. Surakka's lawyer argued lawsuits must be allowed in cases where a charter violation ends with someone's death in order to preserve and enforce the right to life.
Judge Heather Holmes issued a ruling this week that concluded recent changes in how the charter is interpreted mean the case should be allowed to proceed.
"In my view, the plaintiff's claim is precisely the type of novel but arguable claim that should survive a motion to strike," wrote Holmes.
"(Surakka) articulates a reasoned and coherent basis for a reconsideration of (previous case law), drawing from subsequent developments in Canadian law and international human rights law." However, Holmes cautioned the ruling does not deal with the merits of the lawsuit itself, which could still fail at trial.
Lyse Cantin, a spokeswoman for the federal Justice Department, said the government would be reviewing the decision and consider whether to appeal. Such an appeal would have to be filed within 30 days of the original judgment.
Pongracic-Speier, Surakka's lawyer, said it's an important case.
"If the right violated is your right not to be deprived of life and there's no means to vindicate that right, then that seems to be inconsistent with the rule of law and the principles of constitutionalism," she said. One of the RCMP officers involved in the case was docked a day's pay and received a letter of reprimand.
The case also prompted the RCMP to change its policy to require officers to speak directly to a caller who dials 911.
The BC Coroners Service plans to hold an inquest into the deaths of Dudley and McKay, though the date of the hearing has not been set.
Three people were arrested and charged in the killings.
Jack Woodruff pleaded guilty to first-degree murder in March of last year.
Two others, Bruce Main and Justin MacKinnon, are still awaiting trial on charges of first-degree murder.