Alphonse de Valk, general editor, Judicial Activism: a threat to democracy and religion.

Life Ethics Information Centre, 104 Bond St., Suite 301, Toronto, ON, 2003, 168 pages.

Rumblings have been erupting and intensifying for a number of years--essentially, ever since the passage of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982--over what is perceived in many sectors of Canadian society as the overreaching power of the judiciary in shaping Canadian law and, in consequence, Canadian culture. These points of view have frequently been disparate in nature, emanating from sources including conservative and orthodox Christians, certain segments of the justice system and the National Post newspaper. Never before have commentaries and analyses on this issue been collected into one resource, however.

This has changed with the recent publication of Judicial Activism: A threat to democracy and religion, published by the Toronto-based Life Ethics Information Centre. This timely volume nicely brings together some of the leading Canadian writers and thinkers on judicial activism, and provides various perspectives on a problem that has reached fever pitch with recent rulings in favour of so-called same-sex marriage.

As one reads this book, it becomes clear that the subtitle is no exaggeration and accurately describes the severe threats posed by a justice system that allows a few people in robes to basically supersede our elected representatives by formulating and interpreting legislation and the Constitution as they see fit--or as their personal ideologies dictate.

Contributors to the volume include such well-known figures as Ian Hunter, David Dooley, Msgr. Vincent Foy, Gwen Landolt, Rory Leishman, Edward J. McBride, Peter Stock and, of course, Fr. Alphonse de Valk, who serves as general editor of this project.

The opening chapter penned by Edward J. McBride provides a short overview of the judicial activism problem, and places the phenomenon in the context of "those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it." Indeed, as a quote from Abraham Lincoln's first inaugural address makes clear, we've been down this road before in that judicial activism--and the dangers it poses to society--is nothing new.

"The candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation ... the people will have ceased to be their own rulers," said the good president in 1861.

Perhaps that quote should be prominently posted in both the Supreme Court of Canada and the prime minister's office.

McBride goes on to pull no punches, charging that judicial activism "subverts democracy, distorts the rule of law, elevates the rights of some over the rights of others, diminishes the common good and attenuates the capacity for self-governance of an entire people." He characterizes contemporary judges as "partisan combatants in the cultural wars of the day" and "in thrall to the secularist ideology." For them, "law is a dictate of sentiment, for the benefit of a few and the gratification of an elite, pronounced by activist advocates of culturally fashionable causes."

Ian Hunter follows up on this line of thinking by noting that, thanks to the Charter of Rights, the judiciary has moved from being the least powerful branch of government to, arguably, the most powerful. He suggests that laws have now become "a random collection of the judges' personal and ideological predilections." Values, says Hunter, have overtaken virtues in terms of shaping law.

Other chapters examine Supreme Court judges' personal views and ideologies, and how these have affected their decisions; key cases, such as 1999's M. and H., the Marc Hall matter, Halpern et al and Chamberlain v. Surrey; specific threats posed to religious beliefs and more.

No Canadian, especially one who might have any doubts about the perniciousness of judicial activism, should be without this book, which examines one of the most disturbing aspects of the Canadian polity. Those who have been under the delusion that we live in a functional democracy are in for a stern wake-up call.

One can be hopeful that although opposition to judicial activism has been disparate and unco-ordinated to this point, this book may serve as a catalyst for a more effective response to the problem. Certainly, the future of Canada, freedom, democracy and the integrity of our religious beliefs call for it.