Conservatives stand fast on changes to judge-appointment process.

Ottawa -- In December 2006, then federal Minister of Justice Vic Toews revealed that the government would be adding police representatives to judge selection committees by February 2007. An assault led by Canada's leftist legal and media establishments against this plan to enlarge the membership of judicial advisory committees reached fever pitch, but the government has shown no signs of relenting. Critics characterized the effort to enhance the makeup of the committees variously as "interference," "politicizing," "partisan," "muzzling judges," "undermining the intellectual independence of the judiciary," "pushing the courts to the right," "damaging the credibility of the judiciary," and "stacking the deck."

The committees serve to vet prospective appointments to federal and provincial courts. The Conservatives were adding a fourth government nominee, representing the police, to the other three it appoints. The remaining four members of the committee will continue to be chosen by provincial governments, law societies, the Canadian Bar Association and other judges.

Liberals' awful squawk

In its substance, the Conservatives' proposal is rather modest in nature; nonetheless, it triggered an avalanche of criticism from parties self-interested in a continued left-liberal judiciary. As the Calgary Sun's Licia Corbella pointed out (Feb. 14, 2006), dozens, if not hundreds, of judges with ties to the Liberal party were appointed during the period in which that party held the reins of federal power (1993-2006). At that time, however, no cries of protest were heard over "stacking of the courts" and such despite the fact such judges helped usher in monumental social changes, including abortion on demand and same-sex "marriage."

Corbella reminded Canadians that, according to the Gomery commission inquiry into the sponsorship scandal, judicial appointments in Quebec were virtually put up for sale under the Liberal regime. Indeed, eight lawyers who campaigned for the Liberal Party in Quebec during the 2000 election were awarded with judgeships. In addition, another 13 Quebec judges named to the bench after the 2000 election donated money solely to the Liberals in the years prior to their appointments.

The Globe's attack

These facts were carefully overlooked by Canada's most ideologically biased newspaper, Toronto's Globe and Mail. It produced two editorials and assigned columnist John Ibbitson and reporter Campbell Clark to write about the matter, after which the pair produced pieces charging that half the nominees to the judicial advisory committees so far chosen by the justice minister are "conservative partisans." This, according to Ibbitson, is "perverting the rules" and "ideological contamination of the justice system" (Feb. 12, 13, 2007).

Fortunately, critics quickly pointed out the hypocrisy of this argument. Ted Byfield noted that the judicial scenario to this point has been one in which "only left-handed court-packing is allowed." The judge-appointment process has been taking place virtually in secret, he said (WorldNetDaily, Feb. 17, 2007). Toronto lawyer and author Bob Tarantino observed sarcastically: "When the Liberals actually abuse the process, it's not a problem; when Conservatives are wrongly accused of attempting to abuse the process, it's time to man the barricades" (LifeSiteNews, Feb. 12, 2007). Edmonton Journal columnist Lorne Gunter characterized the brouhaha as "an artificial scandal" (Nat. Post, Feb. 19, 2007), while the Ottawa Citizen's John Robson observed the claim that judicial independence is endangered by the Conservatives' moves "is silly at a trivial level ... I actually think the Tories have not gone nearly far enough in reining in the imperial judiciary" (Canada.com, Feb. 16, 2007).

To be continued ... [OMEGA]