|
Government deliberately stacking Highest court with their jesters, puppets and clowns. Only 2 of 9 Judges to our highest "court" considered Anglophones, and only ONE is from the WEST. Morris Fish - Anglophone, born and raised in
QUEBEC
Close on the heels of Prime Minister Martin's "promise" to fix the "democratic deficit", and "western alienation" ... New "justices" BOTH picked for their homosexual/feminist causes.
Justice Louise Charron and Justice Rosalie Abella, both of the Ontario Court of Appeal, have been nominated to fill two vacancies in the Supreme Court of Canada. In announcing the nominations, "Justice" Minister Irwin Cotler said that "merit" and not their positions on individual issues, such as same-sex marriage, were what earned them the nominations. "These are two outstanding jurists," Cotler said. "I think to reduce this issue to one perspective subject matter would be really prejudicial to the integrity of the judges and the independence of the judiciary." [Did he ACTUALLY say "independence of the judiciary"???? Was this a joke aimed at the gullible Canadian sheeple? Are *you* laughing? Is your IQ over 65?] Abella, 58, graduated from the University of Toronto law school in 1970. She practised civil and criminal litigation, and was appointed to the Ontario Family Court in 1976, at the age of 29. She was appointed to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1992. Charron earned her law degree at the University of Ottawa in 1975 and was called to the bar in 1977. She practised civil litigation and was also assistant Crown attorney for the Judicial District of Ottawa-Carleton from 1980 to 1985. She was appointed to the District Court of Ontario in 1988, and named to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1995. Cotler said more details about their qualifications and why they were chosen will come out on Wednesday, when a new vetting process for the two candidates gets underway. But Conservative MPs Vic Toews and Peter MacKay say it's a flawed process. They've long been in favour of parliamentary hearings similar to those held in the United States. In the U.S., prospective Supreme Court judges are grilled by a congressional committee. "We feel it falls far short of having a meaningful consultation with parliamentarians," MacKay said. Toews criticized the ad hoc committee Cotler has put together, consisting of seven MPs and two experts from the legal community. He said it could have included representatives of victims' group or chiefs of police. Wednesday will be the first time public hearings on the nominees' qualifications for the top court job will be held. The hearings will be televised. Cotler is expected to appear before the hearing, not the nominees themselves. Prime Minister Paul Martin has promised to make the appointment process more open. MacKay and Toews said it's another example of Martin breaking his promises. But Martin has said the process would be revised after the current nominations. The government claims it was caught off guard by its two vacancies in the Supreme Court. In June, Louise Arbour accepted the post of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Frank Iacobucci retired. But MacKay had doubts over Martin's commitment to revising the process. "Time will tell, but the past record hasn't been too rosy," he said. On Wednesday, Cotler will field questions about the candidates, but the findings of the panel will be strictly advisory and there will be no formal process for objecting to the nominations. "This procedure is a farce. Our role is to rubber stamp the nominees," MacKay said. "Where does democracy come in this process?" The candidates will officially be appointed after the panel reports. The fall session for the high court begins in six weeks. CTV.ca News Staff http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1093345269099_9/?hub=Canada
Supreme Court of Canada is a Political Toy
TORONTO STAR
Aug. 25, 2004. "Tories blast 'sham' review of judges" Nominees should appear in person, Tory justice critic argues CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA - To hear Justice Minister Irwin Cotler tell it, his two choices to sit on Canada's top court can pretty much walk on water. And no one disagreed with him. The first-ever committee to review Supreme Court candidates aired no qualms today about Ontario Court of Appeal Justices Rosalie Abella and Louise Charron. In fact, the all-party advisory panel of seven MPs and two legal experts asked few questions about the judges themselves. Instead, opposition members on the interim panel spent much of a three-hour session venting frustration about the process. The interim committee has no veto power, did not see a short list of candidates before selections were made, and will issue a non-binding report on Friday. The appointments must then be made official by the prime minister any time after that. Conservative members had to settle for grilling Cotler after the Liberals nixed their request to quiz candidates in person. Conservative deputy leader Peter MacKay called the process "a sham" that breaks Prime Minister Paul Martin's promise to open the high-court selection system. `It's a joke," MacKay said after the hearing. "It's window dressing. It's lip service. It's just running it by us for some form of credibility that doesn't exist." Cotler said he wasn't about to risk judicial integrity by exposing high-court candidates to such queries as "When did you stop beating your wife?" MacKay called the comment "insulting" and said MPs never intended to turn the screenings into a political free-for-all. Still, much of Wednesday's hearing was a mix of grandstanding and partisan clashes. MacKay and Conservative justice critic Vic Toews lambasted Cotler for giving the panel 24 hours' notice, a three-hour televised hearing and just two days to report on the candidates. Abella and Charron weren't announced as nominees until Tuesday. Cotler, on the other hand, spent eight months researching potential nominees, consulting with judges and lawyers, and reviewing rulings. Toews called it a "rubber stamp" process that strips Canadians of their right to know their most powerful jurists. He called it "astounding" that the candidates were not even asked if they would appear before the committee. Cotler fired back that all parties agreed that only the justice minister would take questions on a contender's intellect, demeanour, racial awareness and other attributes. New Democrat MP Joe Comartin reminded Cotler that the Liberals weren't willing to negotiate on that point. MacKay called the hearing a pointless review of a done deal. Conservatives had little choice but to accept a lousy process and fight for future changes, he said. Cotler himself all but confirmed its irrelevance. It would take a lot to change his mind about Abella and Charron, he told the panel. "Only if you can provide any clear, authoritative evidence that would disqualify a person from serving." Both nominees are "outstanding," Cotler repeatedly said. The government tried to broaden public scrutiny of top-court appointments while protecting judicial independence, he said. Even before the hearing began, Toews noted that Abella and Charron are both known for judgments supporting same-sex rights. The nine-member Supreme Court will hold a milestone hearing in October on Liberal efforts to legalize same-sex marriage. Toews suggested a political connection. "It is clear for everyone to see that this is part of the prime minister's agenda" to allow gay weddings, he said. Cotler insisted that merit was his prime consideration when whittling down top candidates. He also dismissed suggestions from some quarters that Abella, a renowned defender of human rights, is soft on crime. "This has no basis in fact," Cotler said, citing a review of her judgments. He also torpedoed the idea that Abella may be the court's next great dissenter. Of 313 judgments since 1994, Abella dissented in 31 - or 10 per cent of cases, he said. Cotler also rejected a Quebec request for the federal government to choose from a list provided by the province to fill future vacancies from Quebec. In a letter sent Aug. 6 to Cotler, Quebec Justice Minister Jacques Dupuis and Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Benoit Pelletier asked for "formal participation" by Quebec in the process. "We insist that we are part of the decisions," they wrote. But Cotler said selecting from a list provided by the province would infringe on the federal government's constitutional right to name justices. |