Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s defence of a partisan lens on judicial appointments was justifiably lambasted.Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press
Critics pounced on Ontario Premier Doug Ford for his vow last month to appoint “like-minded judges” to provincial courts, and especially for his shocking statement that, “I’m not going to appoint some NDP or some Liberal” to serve as a judge.
Mr. Ford had installed two former political aides on the provincial committee that advises his government on judicial appointments, and then doubled down on his right to do so when the backlash came. The partisan lens he trained on judicial appointments was justifiably lambasted.
But his comments could be taken as a politician saying the quiet part out loud: namely, that almost all governments across Canada have injected too much of their own interests into the process of appointing judges.
The politicization of judicial appointments in Canada has been going on for a long time, and the problem arguably starts at the federal level, where most judges are named.
Provincial and territorial governments appoint judges to provincial and territorial courts; Ottawa names them to the federal courts, to the superior and appeals courts of the provinces and territories, to the tax court, and to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Like the Ford government, the Trudeau government has zero issues with an appointments process that, in both appearance and in fact, is far from impartial.
There is a simple fix for this problem at both the federal and provincial levels, and that is to take the politicians out of the process of selecting candidates for the judiciary.
This has been done in Quebec, where a 2003 scandal involving the appointment of judges led to a public inquiry in 2011, which in turn led to what the Canadian advocacy group Democracy Watch says is one of the best judicial appointment systems in the world.
Unlike in Ottawa and Ontario, the Quebec government has a strictly limited say on who sits on the five- or six-person committees that nominate judges. At best, the justice minister can name one person, while all the others are named by the chief justice of the court of Quebec or their designate, members of the bar and legal professionals.
The committee recommends three names for each opening to the justice minister, who then chooses one of them. The minister has the right to refuse all three if they see fit.
Best of all, the Quebec system is codified in a law that expressly forbids the committee and the minister from considering the political affiliations of candidates.
In the rest of Canada, there is much more latitude for governments. Cabinets have the power to name judges, but there are no set rules on how that should be done.
In order to create an appearance of impartiality, Ottawa and the provinces have advisory committees that recommend candidates to their respective cabinets. But while it varies from province to province, governments often have a great deal of control over who sits on those committees.
In Ottawa, the government names six of the seven members (three of those are from lists submitted by the legal community) of each of the 17 judicial advisory committees that recommend candidates for federally appointed judges. In Ontario, the provincial government names 10 out of 13 members of the committee that nominates provincial judges. In both cases, cabinet can reject every proposed candidate.
It gets worse. A 2020 report in The Globe and Mail found that the Trudeau government allows its MPs, ministerial staff and even friends of the party to vet the lists of candidates, and even checks to see whether they donated to the party.
As well, any promotion of a judge from a lower federal court to a higher one is at the complete discretion of the federal justice minister.
In Canada, judges’ independence is protected by three pillars: security of tenure; financial security; and administrative independence. Governments can’t fire a judge or cut their pay, and they can’t assign a judge to a case.
There needs to be a fourth pillar: the legislated impartiality of the system for selecting judicial candidates, as Quebec has done. Democracy Watch took the federal government to court in 2022 over this very question; the case will continue next month, and Canadians ought to be cheering it on.
Because, at the heart of the matter is the whether the selection of judges in Canada is demonstrably and undoubtedly beyond political influence. At the moment, this is simply not the case, and it needs to be fixed.
Quebec legislature member Youri Chassin has announced he’s leaving the Coalition Avenir Québec government to sit as an Independent.
He announced the decision shortly after writing an open letter criticizing Premier François Legault’s government for abandoning its principles of smaller government.
In the letter published in Le Journal de Montréal and Le Journal de Québec, Chassin accused the party of falling back on what he called the old formula of throwing money at problems instead of looking to do things differently.
Chassin says public services are more fragile than ever, despite rising spending that pushed the province to a record $11-billion deficit projected in the last budget.
He is the second CAQ member to leave the party in a little more than one week, after economy and energy minister Pierre Fitzgibbon announced Sept. 4 he would leave because he lost motivation to do his job.
Chassin says he has no intention of joining another party and will instead sit as an Independent until the end of his term.
He has represented the Saint-Jérôme riding since the CAQ rose to power in 2018, but has not served in cabinet.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 12, 2024.
MONTREAL – NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says he will not be taking advice from Pierre Poilievre after the Conservative leader challenged him to bring down government.
“I say directly to Pierre Poilievre: I’m not going to listen to you,” said Singh on Wednesday, accusing Poilievre of wanting to take away dental-care coverage from Canadians, among other things.
“I’m not going to listen to your advice. You want to destroy people’s lives, I want to build up a brighter future.”
Earlier in the day, Poilievre challenged Singh to commit to voting non-confidence in the government, saying his party will force a vote in the House of Commons “at the earliest possibly opportunity.”
“I’m asking Jagmeet Singh and the NDP to commit unequivocally before Monday’s byelections: will they vote non-confidence to bring down the costly coalition and trigger a carbon tax election, or will Jagmeet Singh sell out Canadians again?” Poilievre said.
“It’s put up or shut up time for the NDP.”
While Singh rejected the idea he would ever listen to Poilievre, he did not say how the NDP would vote on a non-confidence motion.
“I’ve said on any vote, we’re going to look at the vote and we’ll make our decision. I’m not going to say our decision ahead of time,” he said.
Singh’s top adviser said on Tuesday the NDP leader is not particularly eager to trigger an election, even as the Conservatives challenge him to do just that.
Anne McGrath, Singh’s principal secretary, says there will be more volatility in Parliament and the odds of an early election have risen.
“I don’t think he is anxious to launch one, or chomping at the bit to have one, but it can happen,” she said in an interview.
New Democrat MPs are in a second day of meetings in Montreal as they nail down a plan for how to navigate the minority Parliament this fall.
The caucus retreat comes one week after Singh announced the party has left the supply-and-confidence agreement with the governing Liberals.
It’s also taking place in the very city where New Democrats are hoping to pick up a seat on Monday, when voters go to the polls in Montreal’s LaSalle—Émard—Verdun. A second byelection is being held that day in the Winnipeg riding of Elmwood—Transcona, where the NDP is hoping to hold onto a seat the Conservatives are also vying for.
While New Democrats are seeking to distance themselves from the Liberals, they don’t appear ready to trigger a general election.
Singh signalled on Tuesday that he will have more to say Wednesday about the party’s strategy for the upcoming sitting.
He is hoping to convince Canadians that his party can defeat the federal Conservatives, who have been riding high in the polls over the last year.
Singh has attacked Poilievre as someone who would bring back Harper-style cuts to programs that Canadians rely on, including the national dental-care program that was part of the supply-and-confidence agreement.
The Canadian Press has asked Poilievre’s office whether the Conservative leader intends to keep the program in place, if he forms government after the next election.
With the return of Parliament just days away, the NDP is also keeping in mind how other parties will look to capitalize on the new makeup of the House of Commons.
The Bloc Québécois has already indicated that it’s written up a list of demands for the Liberals in exchange for support on votes.
The next federal election must take place by October 2025 at the latest.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante is defending her decision to turn off comments on her social media accounts — with an announcement on social media.
She posted screenshots to X this morning of vulgar names she’s been called on the platform, and says comments on her posts for months have been dominated by insults, to the point that she decided to block them.
Montreal’s Opposition leader and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association have criticized Plante for limiting freedom of expression by restricting comments on her X and Instagram accounts.
They say elected officials who use social media should be willing to hear from constituents on those platforms.
However, Plante says some people may believe there is a fundamental right to call someone offensive names and to normalize violence online, but she disagrees.
Her statement on X is closed to comments.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
