Last week the Toronto Star reported that Ontario Premier Doug Ford had appointed two former staffers from his office to the body responsible for appointing provincial judges, the Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee (JAAC).
I hope my comment isn't misconstrued as support for Doug Ford, because I disagree emphatically with the appointment of judges in anticipation of they way they may rule, but I can't see someone with the credentials of Michelle O'Bonsawin being appointed to the Supreme Court without an agendum being applied to the selection process.
The reason I bring this up is because I've seen mainstream criticism of Doug Ford's actions, but don't recall seeing anything for the O'Bonsawin appointment (maybe I missed it), and an intention to bias the appointment process is not as egregious as the actual manifestation of the bias in the appointment.
Perhaps you can unpack what "bias" you think led to O'Bonsawin's appointment? We have a provincial premier explicitly declaring that his judicial selection process is rooted in *partisanship*. What's the comparison here?
Although Mr. Ford explicitly said he would not appoint an NDP or a Liberal, I think Mr. Ford's "partisanship" is that he wanted like-minded people - tough judges to keep criminals in jail.
Ms. O'Bonsawin's bias is probably best enunciated by herself:
"it's important ... to understand that I have my own background that's relevant to me as a Franco Ontarian and an Indigenous woman and I bring that view to the Court that is unique."
You're conflating someone recognizing the relevance of their background with a Premier seeking to turn judicial appointments into a partisan contest. It's simply not a comparison.
Yes, it's the Prime Minister I should have quoted when he referred to her as a female indigenous Franco-Ontarian.
There's a reason why her résumé was included in the list of recommendations, and why it floated to the top to be picked by the Prime Minister. What is the role of a judge anyway? Isn't it to interpret the law and assess evidence? If someone had provided real case examples of distinguished performance from her time as a judge, there would be no doubt as to why she was appointed.
It's called misinformation. He hasn't appointed "mostly Judges who contribute to his Party." 18% of all judges and tribunal members appointed under Trudeau had appointed to political parties. A majority *of those* had contributed to the Liberals, but he also appointed judges who had in the past donated to the Conservatives, NDP, etc.
Well said, well presented and totally true. I recall Harper's years as PM and his losses in court. Labeling judges as Liberal, liberal NDP is just plain ignorance. However, the present Premiers in ON, AB, SK and NB and former in MB have shown by their comments, legislation and now polarization that they aren't really the leadership we need in spite of the bumpf and bafflegab they spout. Power and control is their agenda. Look after the radical right
I hope my comment isn't misconstrued as support for Doug Ford, because I disagree emphatically with the appointment of judges in anticipation of they way they may rule, but I can't see someone with the credentials of Michelle O'Bonsawin being appointed to the Supreme Court without an agendum being applied to the selection process.
The reason I bring this up is because I've seen mainstream criticism of Doug Ford's actions, but don't recall seeing anything for the O'Bonsawin appointment (maybe I missed it), and an intention to bias the appointment process is not as egregious as the actual manifestation of the bias in the appointment.
Perhaps you can unpack what "bias" you think led to O'Bonsawin's appointment? We have a provincial premier explicitly declaring that his judicial selection process is rooted in *partisanship*. What's the comparison here?
Although Mr. Ford explicitly said he would not appoint an NDP or a Liberal, I think Mr. Ford's "partisanship" is that he wanted like-minded people - tough judges to keep criminals in jail.
Ms. O'Bonsawin's bias is probably best enunciated by herself:
"it's important ... to understand that I have my own background that's relevant to me as a Franco Ontarian and an Indigenous woman and I bring that view to the Court that is unique."
You're conflating someone recognizing the relevance of their background with a Premier seeking to turn judicial appointments into a partisan contest. It's simply not a comparison.
Yes, it's the Prime Minister I should have quoted when he referred to her as a female indigenous Franco-Ontarian.
There's a reason why her résumé was included in the list of recommendations, and why it floated to the top to be picked by the Prime Minister. What is the role of a judge anyway? Isn't it to interpret the law and assess evidence? If someone had provided real case examples of distinguished performance from her time as a judge, there would be no doubt as to why she was appointed.
So when the current PM appoints mostly Judges who contribute to his Party that called what?
It's called misinformation. He hasn't appointed "mostly Judges who contribute to his Party." 18% of all judges and tribunal members appointed under Trudeau had appointed to political parties. A majority *of those* had contributed to the Liberals, but he also appointed judges who had in the past donated to the Conservatives, NDP, etc.
Well said, well presented and totally true. I recall Harper's years as PM and his losses in court. Labeling judges as Liberal, liberal NDP is just plain ignorance. However, the present Premiers in ON, AB, SK and NB and former in MB have shown by their comments, legislation and now polarization that they aren't really the leadership we need in spite of the bumpf and bafflegab they spout. Power and control is their agenda. Look after the radical right