Province won’t meet with legal groups over judge row
Ford’s ‘like-minded judges’ comment raises concern over impartial selection
The Ontario government is refusing to meet with organizations representing thousands of lawyers to discuss Premier Doug Ford’s desire for “like-minded judges.”
Instead, Attorney General Doug Downey’s office told the legal groups last week to put their concerns in writing.
“Obviously, the recent comments from the Premier have caused significant alarm. If the Premier isn’t looking to politicize our courts, why doesn’t his government want to discuss the crime issues they claim to be troubled by?” Douglas Judson, chair of the Federation of Ontario Law Associations, told the Star in a statement.
Ford sparked a constitutional crisis in February with his comments on judicial appointments, which came in response to a Star exclusive that Downey had put two of Ford’s ex-staffers on the arm’s-length committee that vets and recommends judges for the Ontario Court of Justice.
Matthew Bondy, Ford’s former deputy chief of staff, has been chair of the judicial appointments advisory committee (JAAC) since Feb. 1, while Ford’s ex-director of stakeholder relations Brock Vandrick has also been a public member of the committee since December.
The federation, which has a representative on the JAAC, wrote to Ford and Downey in mid-March requesting the meeting and proposed including representatives from more than a dozen other legal organizations, including those representing female, racialized and family lawyers.
Highlighting that the “meritbased selection and political independence of judges is paramount to the health of our legal and democratic system,” the federation said it wanted to discuss the appointments process, diversity on the bench, as well as for the government to “share its priorities and clarify some of its objectives.”
In declining the invitation last Thursday, Downey’s office noted in an email that there had been “significant public debate” recently.
“Although improvements can be made to the existing system, we are confident judicial independence will remain fully intact. We would be happy to receive any written concerns for consideration but respectfully decline your invitation.”
A spokesperson for Downey said Monday that the response stands.
Judson wondered in his statement to the Star why the government wouldn’t want to hear directly from those who work in the justice system about what could be done to address any issues.
“The unwillingness to have a substantive discussion suggests that this has either always been about disrespecting the court to score cheap political points, or that the government knows the Premier’s words are indefensible and wants to move on,” he said.
The Ontario chapter of the Federation of Asian Canadian Lawyers said it was “truly disappointed” in the government’s decision not to meet, and that Ford’s intentions for judicial appointments “upends decades of impartial and merit-based selection that yielded appointments across a range of legal, cultural, and political backgrounds.”
Ford has repeatedly made his “like-minded judges” comments in the context of wanting to get tougher on crime, accusing the courts of being too lenient and releasing too many accused people on bail pending their trials. His position has been described by legal groups as a “substantial threat” to the independence of the courts and public confidence in the justice system, and led three former provincial court chief justices to issue a rare public rebuke, reminding Ford that judges do not take orders from government.
In yet another letter sent to Ford just over a week ago, the Family Lawyers Association warned that his stance could lead to the appointment of judges in family court who have no familiarity with that area of the law. (While the Ontario Court of Justice handles the bulk of the province’s criminal caseload, it also hears a large number of family and child protection matters.)
“It would be like going to an artist for an oil change,” wrote association co-chair Mary Reilly. “The impact of a skewed appointment process on child protection cannot be ignored. If a wrong decision is made in a child protection matter, it could severely impact the life of a child.”
‘ ‘ If (Doug Ford) isn’t looking to politicize our courts, why doesn’t his government want to discuss the crime issues they claim to be troubled by?
DOUGLAS JUDSON CHAIR OF THE FEDERATION OF ONTARIO LAW ASSOCIATIONS