Judicial independence is key for top court
Sheilah Martin stresses respect for boundaries in regards to sensitivity training
OTTAWA— Justice Sheilah Martin, tapped to become Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s second appointment to the country’s top court, cautioned legislators to respect judicial independence when it comes to mandatory sex assault training or other sensitivity training for judges.
In a wide-ranging appearance that sprawled over two and a half hours Monday, Martin introduced herself in person to parliamentarians and Canadians beyond a lengthy application made public when Trudeau announced her elevation to the Supreme Court of Canada last week.
In what she admitted was rather rusty French and in English, Martin parried questions about her views on the role of courts and judges, and how much deference they owe to Parliament on social policy or public security.
For the most part, she declined to comment on issues that could come before the high court, saying she saw the role of the judge as being a “neu- tral arbiter.” And she displayed a sense of humour — “I have seven children, proof I can multi-task, resolve conflict and have zero chance of a swollen head.”
But in the course of separate answers to two Conservative lawmak- ers, Martin sent a clear signal to parliamentarians to be wary of trampling on judicial independence.
Conservative justice critic Rob Nicholson had raised Bill C-337, also known as the JUST Act, sponsored by former interim leader Rona Am- brose, that would require judicial training in sexual assault law. The bill’s passage has slowed in the senate, where some senators have expressed concerns about its impact on the independence of the judiciary.
Martin said she would not comment on any bill before Parliament, even as she quipped, “I’m an old law professor and rarely heard a good argument in favour of less education.”
Then Martin adopted a serious cautionary tone. “When you’re dealing with the education of judges, or, in this case I guess potential judges, one always has to be exceptionally mindful of the countervailing requirement of judicial independence and who leads the education and what its content is.”
She said many provincial and national organizations, particularly the National Judicial Institute, play a role in educating judges and she hailed its expertise.
Conservative Sen. Pierre-Hugues Boisvenue, a longtime victims’ rights advocate since the murder of his daughter by a repeat offender, pressed her on whether courts should give more generous recognition to victims’ rights.
“It’s always a question of reconciliation between laws and rights, we’ll see,” Martin said. “This is exactly the kind of issue that will be in front of the court in the future.”
And when Boisvenue pressed her on the need for greater judicial education “to be more sensitive to violence against women in domestic cases,” because victims were leaving the court “disappointed,” Martin again pointed to the National Judicial Institute, which she said offers courses and training on how to assess the facts, evidentiary proof principles and the social context of women “that will help the situation.”
Martin, 60, spoke passionately about work she did as a lawyer with her late husband and noted criminal lawyer Hersh Wolch on redress for David Milgaard, wrongfully convicted of the murder of a Saskatchewan nurse Gail Miller. “Through David, I also learned about moral courage . . . and the capacity of the human heart to forgive,” she said.
Overall, Martin stressed the need for judges to treat litigants with respect and to be “careful” when dealing with sensitive or controversial issues for the first time, such as her own handling of one of the first requests for physician-assisted dying before it was legislated.
“You have to show respect in order to get respect,” she said.