Judge faces probe after disputing land claim
The property across the road from the beach has been in Ontario Superior Court Justice Frank Newbould’s family for nearly 100 years. Newbould himself has “been cottaging at Sauble Beach since 1943 when first born,” he wrote in 2014.
At the time, the town of South Bruce Peninsula, which encompasses Lake Huron’s Sauble Beach, was debating whether to accept a land claim settlement that would have extended the territory of the Saugeen First Nation to within about 400 metres of Newbould’s cottage.
In two detailed letters and a presentation at a public meeting, the respected judge spelled out why the town should fight the land claim. The First Nation’s case for expanding its reserve, which was supported by the federal government, was based on a flawed interpretation of historical land surveys, Newbould said.
Saying he was “speaking as a cottage owner,” he warned that agreeing to the claim could change the character of the beach. The native band would likely seek revenue by allowing cars on the beach, charging user fees and selling cigarettes, as it did on a portion of the 11-kilometre beach already under the band’s control.
Now, as he nears retirement, Newbould’s intervention to protect the beach of his childhood summers risks tarnishing a reputation that saw him named one of the 25 most influential members of the legal profession last year by Canadian Lawyer magazine.
On Monday, the Canadian Judicial Council announced that it will conduct a public inquiry into Newbould’s conduct in relation to the land claim. A CJC review panel concluded that, if proven, the allegations that Newbould intervened in the context of a court case “could be so serious that they may warrant the judge’s removal from office,” the council said in a statement.
The detailed allegations have not yet been made public, but they stem from a complaint by the Indigenous Bar Association. Scott Robertson, vice-president of the IBA, said Newbould’s 2014 intervention helped derail the Saugeen First Nation’s “hard-fought negotiations” to resolve its land claim. The matter is now before the courts. Robertson said it was improper for Newbould to take a stand on an issue that he knew could wind up before the Superior Court.
In a statement Tuesday, Newbould’s lawyer said the CJC had already reviewed a complaint from the IBA and dismissed it in January 2015. The lawyer, Brian Gover, said the chairperson of the CJC’s judicial conduct committee determined it was not in the public interest to investigate the complaint.
Gover said the case was resurrected after the president of the IBA, Koren Lightning-Earle, asked the CJC to reconsider its decision and threatened possible “political action” if it did not.
Newbould maintains that once the complaints were dismissed, the CJC has no jurisdiction to reconsider a closed complaint. A CJC spokeswoman said the council reopened the file after receiving additional information.
Newbould apologized in 2014 “due to the perception caused by the fact he is a judge,” Gover said. He declined to specify to whom the apology was made. “Throughout the entirety of his distinguished judicial career, Justice Newbould has carried out his duties effectively and without bias,” he added.