Review of a complaint against the Chief Justice of Canada
Ottawa, 25 September 2008 – The Canadian Judicial Council announced today the results of its review of a complaint against the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, Chief Justice of Canada. The complaint was made by way of 11 identical form letters from individuals. Two additional complaints were received by email.
Although Chief Justice McLachlin is the Chairperson of the Canadian Judicial Council, she never participates in the review of judicial conduct matters, since these can sometimes become the subject of judicial review which could, by way of appeal, come before the Supreme Court of Canada.
The Council’s Complaints Procedures provide that complaints are reviewed by a member of the Council’s Judicial Conduct Committee, in this case Chief Justice Richard Scott. After considering the facts of the case, Chief Justice Scott determined that this was not a judicial conduct matter and that the complaints should accordingly be dismissed.
Whenever a complaint involves a member of the Canadian Judicial Council, an outside lawyer is asked to review the matter and provide his or her own views on the proposed decision by the Judicial Conduct Committee member. In this case, the matter was referred to Mr Thomas G. Heintzman, O.C., Q.C., of the law firm McCarthy Tétrault. After his own review of the complaints, Mr Heintzman agreed that they should be dismissed for the reasons given by Chief Justice Scott. These are outlined in a letter sent to all the complainants.
Given the public interest in this matter, and the fact that the complaint itself was made public, the letter to the complainants, closing the file in this case, is made available on the Council’s website.
The Canadian Judicial Council is composed of the chief justices and associate chief justices of Canada’s superior courts. Information about the Council can be found on the Council’s website: www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca.
Contact:
Norman Sabourin, Executive Director and Senior General Counsel
613-288-1566 ext. 301
Complaints and Inquiries process:
When someone believes that a judge’s personal conduct (on or off the bench) is in question, a complaint may be made to the Canadian Judicial Council. The Council examines only issues of conduct and does not review a judge’s decision in law.
The complaints process is simple: the complaint must be in writing, and it must concern the conduct of a federally appointed judge. No special forms are necessary. No legal counsel is required. No fees are charged. To the extent possible, the Council reviews anonymous complaints in the same way as complaints that are signed.
When a complaint is made, the question before the Council is ultimately whether or not a judge’s conduct prevents that judge from discharging their duties as a judge. In such a case, the Council must decide whether or not to recommend that a judge be removed from office.
A complaint is first reviewed by a member of the Judicial Conduct Committee. A complaint can be dismissed when it is clearly frivolous or does not fall within the mandate of the Council. In roughly half of cases, the complaint is studied in more detail and the judge in question, as well as judge’s chief justice, are sent a copy of the complaint and asked for their comments. The complaint is often resolved at this stage, with an appropriate letter of explanation to the complainant.
If the complaint cannot be resolved at that stage, the file can be referred to a Panel of up to five judges for further review. When a Panel concludes that the complaint has merit but is not serious enough to move to the next stage (a formal hearing by an Inquiry Committee) then the Panel may close the file with an expression of concern, or may recommend counselling or other remedial measures.
When the complaint may be serious enough to warrant the judge’s removal, the Panel can recommend that the Council establish an Inquiry Committee. After completing its investigation, an Inquiry Committee reports its findings to the Canadian Judicial Council. The Council then decides whether or not to recommend to the Minister of Justice of Canada that the judge be removed from office. In accordance with the provision of Canada’s Constitution, a judge may be removed from office only after a joint resolution by Parliament.