Judicial appointments / free speech.

This section contains news items about the politics of the culture wars. Other items may be found in the magazine's regular News in Brief, Canada, section.--Editor

Judicial appointments

Toronto -- The Toronto Star and Globe and Mail newspapers, like so many other Canadian dailies, continue to maintain their blatantly socially liberal, anti-life reputations. This time they drone on about the allegedly excessive length of time the Conservative federal government is taking in naming judges to vacancies.

"The Harper government has been fumbling its responsibility to name federally appointed judges," whined the Globe in a Jan. 12, 2007 editorial. The newspaper confessed it was not concerned about the speed of judicial appointments but in making sure that the government "isn't picking and choosing to find judges it thinks will echo its conservative views."

The Star quoted Ontario's top trial judge the same day, as she declared that wait times for criminal trials have become "dangerously extended." She blamed the federal government's "delay" in filling judicial vacancies.

The Star then referred to a statement by Ontario Chief Justice Roy McMurtry, who in the fall of 2006 had a judicial complaint filed against him for not recusing himself from cases related to homosexuality after it was found his daughter was in a lesbian relationship.

"I am concerned about the potential for (the judge-appointment process) to become politicized," intoned McMurtry, as if to say that the appointments under Liberal governments have not been "political." The occasion was a dinner for McMurtry in light of his coming retirement this spring, at which the liberal legal establishment gave him a standing ovation. Meanwhile, the judicial complaint has been turned down.

One is irked by what is clearly the media's double standard regarding the judicial appointment process and the politicization of the judiciary. No editorials criticizing previous Liberal governments, for example, were published when the court system experienced similar backlogs in the past. Nor did the media complain of the politicization of the judiciary when courts produced an almost continuous string of socially liberal, i.e., by Christian standards immoral, rulings on important issues, such as marriage and the equality of the homosexual lifestyle.

Government firm on new judge appointment process

Ottawa -- Despite intense pressure from vested interests, and a change in justice ministers, the federal government is standing firm for the time being in its resolve to change the process by which judges are selected. In November former justice minister Vic Toews had announced the government's intention to add representatives of the police to judicial advisory committees. This elicited protests from lawyers and other legal bodies up to and including Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin. Toews held fast, however, until he was shuffled out of the justice portfolio in January.

This turned the spotlight on the new Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson, of whom MP Art Hanger, chair of the House of Commons justice committee, had said that he expects no change in direction. The president of the 54,000-member Canadian Professional Police Association also expected Nicholson to proceed with the plans Toews initiated.

The new process moved forward in mid-January when the government named the first police officials to sit on judicial advisory committees. The appointees ranged from a Vancouver detective who worked on the Robert Pickton murder case, to a Toronto police union leader. Not unexpectedly, lawyers' groups said that although they were pleased with the level of experience these police representatives brought to the committees, they were worried about the law enforcement officials' "partiality." But the Globe could not help complaining.

Toronto lawyer William Kaplan, in a Globe and Mail commentary, correctly lumped in the new judge-appointment arrangement with the Conservative government's shutting down of the Court Challenges Program and the abolition of the Law Commission of Canada. But he then falsified the motivation: "Giving the police a say in the judicial-appointments process, and thereby creating an impression that judges are beholden to the police, is just wrong," Kaplan charged.

Harper government discontinues threat to New Brunswick 

Fredericton -- The federal Minister of Health, Tony Clement, will not be pursuing the matter of funding for in-profit abortion facilities in New Brunswick. The previous Tory provincial government had consistently refused to fund Morgentaler's clinic, in keeping with the Canada Health Act which specifies that it is up to the province to decide what it will cover financially. The former federal Liberals had insisted that the province fund Morgentaler's clinic. With the federal Conservatives leaving the decision up to the province, it is now a non-issue. The newly elected Liberal provincial government has indicated it has no interest in changing the status quo.

Free speech denied again

Kamloops -- Free speech in opposing the homosexual lifestyle is subject to fines and public apology. The latest assault comes again from the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal (BCHRT). Kamloops businessman and city councillor John DiCicco made the error of remarking in a private conversation that homosexual acts are "not normal and not natural." He did so without rancour, without malice and following the teachings of the Catholic Church (Catechism item no. 2357--"homosexual acts are gravely disordered"). DiCicco is a practising Catholic and a Knight of Columbus.

This past summer, Mr. DiCicco's barbershop was vandalized because in Council he had opposed 'gay pride' week. He did not complain to the police, nor make a complaint of harassment. He simply cleaned up the mess and went about his business.

But the thought police of the BCHRT, acting on a complaint by a 'gay' couple, took him to task for his statement. To avoid a drawn-out and costly Human Rights Tribunal hearing, a hearing in which in today's politically correct climate he had little chance of winning, Mr. DiCicco accepted a $1,000 fine (paid by the city of Kamloops) and offered a public apology.

Mr. DiCicco, an Italian immigrant and a fiercely proud Canadian said: "In this great nation of ours we can express our opinions, and when you can't there's something wrong." He says that he will not change his opposition to 'gay pride' week. "I'm not going to change my view of my stand. My public comments have to be a little more refined" (LiFeSiteNews, Jan. 18, 2007).

Michael Coren, writing in the Toronto Sun, stood squarely behind Mr. DiCicco in his column of January 27, 2007 ("Give us the freedom to speak our minds"), explicitly repeating the statement that homosexual acts are "not normal and not natural." He pointed out that, although there may be many Canadians who may not agree with the Catholic Church's teachings, it is nevertheless a right in our country to express firmly-held beliefs.

Comment

Catholic Insight also backs Mr. DiCicco 100 percent. We believe that the time has come For British Columbians to take legal and political steps to challenge their Human Rights Tribunal. The rulings of these tribunals should be made into an election issue in all provinces and across the country.