They are the arbiters of the arbiters of justice, a council of Canadian judges whose collective gavel is used every so often to investigate and reprimand their peers.
Since its inception in 1971, the Canadian Judicial Council has held the power under the federal “Judges Act” to investigate complaints about any of the roughly 1,100 federally-appointed judges of Canada’s superior courts.
“Judges exercise tremendous power and tremendous responsibility in Canadian society . . . but nobody expects that judges are going to be flawless,” said University of Ottawa law professor Adam Dodek. “It reinforces public confidence that there is a process dealing with public complaints.”
The council, a 30-member board of chief justices, associate chief justices, and senior judges from provincial and federal superior courts across the country, receives “200 or so” complaints regarding judicial conduct every year, according to its website.
Most complaints are resolved within three months, but those containing serious allegations go through a multi-step process to determine whether the judge should be removed from office.
Serious allegations could result in a full public inquiry where a committee of council members and senior judges may recommend that the judge be removed. In that case, the Minister of Justice would bring the council’s recommendation to Parliament for final consideration.
These proceedings are rare, however.
The Canadian Judicial Council has referred just nine complaints to an inquiry committee in its 41-year history, including Lori Douglas, an associate chief justice of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench whose public inquiry began earlier this month. Of the few times when a committee has recommended that a judge be removed from office, no judge has allowed Parliament decide their fate, resigning before that step is taken.
2009: Justice Paul Cosgrove
A former Scarborough mayor and Liberal cabinet minister, Ontario Justice Paul Cosgrove grabbed headlines in the late 1990s during a sensational murder case involving Julia Elliot,a former Barbados masseuse on trial for killing a mechanic.
After two years of pre-trial arguments, Cosgrove set Elliot free and instead said police and Crown attorneys had committed more than 150 violations of her Charter rights. Those charges, however, were overturned four years later when the Ontario Court of Appeal determined that Cosgrove’s conclusions were baseless.
At a judicial inquiry into Cosgrove’s handling of the case in 2009, a committee found that his misconduct was “pervasive in both scope and duration” and recommended that he be removed from office. He resigned two days later, before Parliament made its decision.
2008: Justice Theodore (Ted) Matlow
The Toronto resident and Ontario Superior Court Justice wound up before a judicial inquiry in 2008 after he became involved in a citizen’s committee that opposed a development proposal for a retail-condominium complex in his Forest Hill neighbourhood.
A judicial inquiry was called and a five-person inquiry committee concluded that there were grounds for the CJC to recommend he be removed from office. . But, in Dec. 2008, the entire CJC decided not to follow the committee’s recommendation and allowed Matlow to keep his job..
2003: Justice Jean-Guy Boilard
The Canadian Judicial Council launched an inquiry into the conduct of Superior Court of Quebec Justice Jean-Guy Boilard after he recused himself from a Hells Angels trial in 2002. The committee concluded in 2003 that his decision to withdraw from the case was “improper,” but ruled that his actions did not warrant his removal from office.
2003: Justice Bernard Flynn
Superior Court of Quebec Justice Bernard Flynn landed in hot water after he allegedly made comments to a Le Devoir journalist in 2002 about a controversial land purchase outside Montreal. In 2003, a judicial committee said it “disapproved” of the statements made by Flynn, but concluded that his actions did not constitute misconduct. He remained in office.
1999: Justice Robert Flahiff
Quebec Superior Court Justice Robert Flahiff was brought before a judicial inquiry committee in 1999 after he was sentenced to three years in prison for money laundering, a crime that took place in the 1980s, prior to his appointment to the bench. Flahiff resigned after the committee recommended that he be removed from office.
1996: Justice Jean Bienvenue
Derogatory comments about women and the Holocaust brought Superior Court of Quebec Justice Jean Bienvenue before an inquiry committee in 1996. The committee — after reviewing the comments made during a sentencing hearing for Tracy Theberge, who was convicted of second-degree murder in the death of her husband — recommended his removal from office, but Bienvenue resigned before Parliament could decide his fate.
1994: Justice Fernand L. Gratton
Gratton, a judge of the Ontario Court of Justice, was accused in 1992 of continuing to receive a regular judicial salary over a two-year period despite the fact that he was unable to work due to medical problems, including a “severe and debilitating stroke.” In 1994, an inquiry committee began to examine whether Gratton should be removed from office due to “infirmity or incapacitation.” He resigned before the hearing concluded.
1990: Justice Gordon Hart, Justice Malachi Jones and Justice Angus Macdonald
The three Nova Scotia Appeal Court justices came under scrutiny after they partially blamed a Nova Scotia man for his wrongful murder conviction in 1983. In their inquiry decision, the judicial committee criticized the judges for “inappropriate language” levelled against the wrongly accused, Donald Marshall, but ultimately decided not to recommend the judges’ removal from office.
Note: This article was edited to correct a previous version that included errors about Justice Theodore Matlow.
Niamh Scallan
Staff Reporter
THE STAR
Reference:
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/1233075--lori-douglas-sex-scandal-inquiry-a-rare-public-inquiry-by-canadian-judicial-council
