Justice plans to axe long-serving CCRB chair
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
While there’s plenty to fix in the system that deals with people found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial because of mental illness or incapacity, close observers of that system say the Criminal Code Review Board (CCRB) isn’t in that category.
Yet that’s where the Nova Scotia government has set its sights. The CCRB may not be broken, but the Justice Department is going to lop off its head anyway. Why? The lengthy defence provided by the department boils down to three words: Because we can.
There’s a chronic bed shortage in the forensic hospital’s rehabilitation units. There’s no room in the province’s group or small options homes for patients deemed ready to return to the community. As a result, people are held in close confinement long after their doctors and the CCRB have determined they should have greater liberty.
You’d expect a department named “justice” to be motivated to do something about that. You’d be wrong, particularly when those problems can be left on another doorstep.
Inadequacies at the forensic hospital in Dartmouth can be blamed on the Health Department and the small options homes fall under Community Services’ purview. The various parts of the provincial government like to boast that they’re all pulling together when, at least as often, they’re passing the buck.
Rather than address those or other problems in the system, Nova Scotia’s Justice Department has decided that the longserving chair of the CCRB, Truro lawyer Peter Lederman, has to go.
The above mentioned close observers of the CCRB do not include Justice Minister Mark Furey or Deputy Minister Karen Hudson, who’ve never set foot in a CCRB hearing, nor is there any evidence that they reached out to board members or anyone else involved in the CCRB’S work to ascertain if a change in leadership is even advisable.
Such outreach would be the minimum due diligence on the department’s part before it fundamentally alters the makeup of one of the most sensitive and consequential boards under provincial jurisdiction.
Had they done their due diligence, they’d have found out that the current board chair is held in high regard by his board colleagues and by others who have regular dealings with the CCRB.
Lederman is also highly respected by review board chairs across Canada. He recently became the longest-serving chair in the land, which is no mean feat since other provinces recognize that there’s no substitute for an experienced chair, so they hang on to the good ones.
The Nova Scotia government, on the other hand, believes the board needs “refreshment.” How it came to that conclusion is a mystery. Insofar as it applies to the CCRB’S chair, it is not a view that’s shared by those with deep knowledge of the Nova Scotia board.
The CCRB tries to strike the right balance between protecting the rights of the accused and ensuring public safety.
It essentially determines how much, if any, freedom should be granted people found not criminally responsible for an offence by reason of mental incapacity. Continuity on the board is vital, because it tracks the progress of each individual held under those conditions and applies that knowledge in its decisions.
In Nova Scotia, Lederman has been the constant at CCRB hearings for more than 17 years. He was a board member before taking over as chair in 2002.
The Justice Department claims the qualifications it demands will ensure the next chair is equipped for the role.
But, beyond the requirement established by the federal government in the Criminal Code – the chair must have the same qualifications required of a judge – the department’s “mandatory qualifications” are generic: leadership abilities, experience chairing boards or large meetings, problem-solving skills, experience leading groups, consensus building, and above average written and verbal communication skills.
Lederman says for the board to function effectively the chair requires knowledge of forensic psychiatry, forensic psychology, risk assessment, general criminal law and administrative law. He practised criminal law for 22 years prior to his appointment and is a qualified arbitrator, plus he had board experience before being named chair.
The critical advantage he brings is familiarity with the patients who are currently in the system.
The provincial government, it seems, is content to toss away that advantage in the interest of “refreshment.” Too bad they wouldn’t turn their attention to fixing what’s broken, rather than risk breaking what works.