The Canadian Judicial Council will hold a public meeting in the case of Justice P.T. Matlow

Ottawa, 12 June 2008 - In line with the Canadian Judicial Council’s Inquiries and Investigations By-laws, the Council has been informed that the Honourable Theodore Matlow, of the Superior Court of Ontario, intends to submit a written response and appear before Council to make a brief oral statement about the Inquiry Committee’s report made public on 29 May 2008.  The Council plans to hold a public meeting on 21 July 2008, beginning at 10:00 a.m., at the Alpine Room, Conference Level, Sheraton Gateway Hotel, Terminal 3, Lester B. Pearson International Airport in Toronto, Ontario. 

The Inquiry Committee created to review the conduct of Justice Matlow submitted its report detailing its findings and conclusions to the Canadian Judicial Council at the end of May 2008.  The Inquiry Committee’s report, available on the Council’s website, concludes that there are grounds to justify making a recommendation for the removal of Mr Justice Matlow from judicial office.

Under the Council’s By-laws, Justice Matlow has until 30 June 2008 to submit a written response to the Council regarding the report.  The By-laws also provide that he can appear in person before Council, with or without his lawyer, for the purpose of making a brief oral statement regarding the report.  The Independent Counsel in this matter, Mr Douglas Hunt, may also present a reply to any written response, or to an oral statement made by Justice Matlow.  Written submissions will be made public.

After hearing all submissions, the Council will prepare a recommendation to the Minister of Justice, indicating whether Justice Matlow should be removed from office for any of the reasons set out in section 65(2) of the Judges Act.  In accordance with Canada’s Constitution, a judge may only be removed from office through a joint resolution of Parliament.  

The Canadian Judicial Council is composed of the chief justices and associate chief justices of Canada’s superior courts.  Information about the Council, including documents related to the Inquiry Committee in this matter, 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 his 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.

Background Information:

The Inquiry Committee that reviewed the conduct of Justice Matlow is composed of three judicial members, appointed by the Council, and two senior lawyers, appointed by the Minister of Justice. The members of the Committee are: 

The Honourable Clyde K. Wells, Chief Justice of Newfoundland and Labrador (Chairperson); The Honourable François Rolland, Chief Justice, Superior Court of Quebec; The Honourable Ronald Veale, Senior Judge, Supreme Court of the Yukon Territory; Maria Lynn Freeland, Senior Crown Prosecutor, of Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan; and Douglas M. Hummell, Barrister and Solicitor, of St. Catharines, Ontario.

Mr Douglas Hunt, of the law firm Hunt Partners LLP, is the Independent Counsel regarding this matter.  The mandate of Independent Counsel is to act in the public interest and to bring all relevant facts and points of law before the Committee for its consideration, and to respond to any further representations made to Council by the judge.  Justice Matlow is represented by Paul Cavalluzzo of the firm Cavalluzzo, Hayes, Shilton, McIntyre & Cornish LLP.