By James Morton, Ottawa Citizen Special
http://bit.ly/9OcywD
The ongoing judicial appointments scandal in Quebec has raised the issue of politics in the appointment of judges. Influence peddling in the way judges are nominated in the Canada is wholly unacceptable and no credible observer suggests that party affiliation ought to be a basis for the appointment of judges. That said, should the policy preferences of judicial candidates be considered before their appointment?
Perhaps surprisingly, the answer is yes.
2 comments:
It may matter but it matters too much.
I believe that all but one SCJ belonged to a political party before they became judges.
When you consider that <3% of the population at large belongs to a party it is extremely suspicious.
Bottom line is this.If you are a great lawyer and you aspire to be a judge or perhaps even a SCJ you must join a political party.It seems that you must get your name out within a political party and you must use your skills within that party to do so.
I'd prefer that most judges would recognize that no party is perfect and that all parties have ideas and philosophies worth supporting.The highly political atmosphere that appears to exist within the courts makes that concept virtually impossible.
Loyalty to a party is a must to advance up the ranks.
Let me remind you that it was a Liberal leader (Martin) who warned Canadians during an election that his opponent would abuse the power and appoint judges that would be "scary" for Canada. He didn't stop there;he went on to suggest that the rights of women and minorities etc. would be trampled.
It is difficult to accept with these threats that any Liberal could support the status quo. Libs believe that a PM can in short order use the courts to cripple human rights.
No Liberal as far as I could tell challenged Martin on his frightening prospect.
It seems the system is fine until someone else is in power.
My point is that the overt politics is bad -- and it is bad Liberal, Conservative or NDP. But the more subtle stuff is important. I'm a "blue liberal" -- big shock there -- and if the people elect a hard libertarian government why should they appoint me? Not because of my party membership but because of the underlying principles. As for membership, I think the comparator is not the general population but rather lawyers globally. In my experience most every lawyer is a member of a party -- even if there is no consideration at all of being a judge.
Post a Comment