Two Members of Parliament alleged that remarks by the Chief Justice of Québec about the judicial appointments process, made during radio interviews, had “tainted judicial independence in Canada” and “discredited the entire judiciary

20050003 - Two Members of Parliament alleged that remarks by the Chief Justice of Québec about the judicial appointments process, made during radio interviews, had “tainted judicial independence in Canada” and “discredited the entire judiciary.” The remarks involved the allegiance of candidates for the Bench.

The Vice-chairperson of the Judicial Conduct Committee reviewed the recordings and transcripts from the actual media interviews given by the judge. He found that the judge’s interventions formed part of public discussions on matters regarding the administration of justice; that the judge had made specific efforts to clarify his views on the issue of political beliefs during subsequent interviews, and that he had publicly stated his deep regret for the controversy his remarks created. The Vice-chairperson also noted that Chief Justices have a responsibility to speak publicly about matters relating to the administration of justice and that this was clearly such a matter.

Given the entire context, the Vice-chairperson concluded that the conduct in question was not inappropriate and determined that the complaint against the Chief Justice of Québec did not need to be considered further.When a complaint is made against a member of the Judicial Council, the case must be reviewed by an outside lawyer. In this case, a well-known and respected Montreal lawyer was asked to review the complaint; he indicated his complete agreement with the decision.