Pubdate: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 Source: Globe and Mail (Canada) Copyright: 2007, The Globe and Mail Company Contact: http://www.globeandmail.ca/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/168 Author: Campbell Clark HARPER BRUSHES OFF JUDICIAL CRITICS ON APPOINTMENTS OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper dismissed the warning shot fired by Canada's judiciary over the Conservatives' changes to the way judges are appointed, insisting his government won't leave the vetting of judges' qualifications to "a private club of judges and lawyers." In an unusual war of words between the Prime Minister and Canada's judges, Mr. Harper batted back charges that the independence of the judiciary is at risk, asserting the government has the power to appoint judges, and suggesting that the judges want to exclude others. "Under our constitutional system the naming of judges is the responsibility of the elected executive arm of government," he said in the House of Commons yesterday. "This government has established an independent consultative process that includes, in fact, a broader representation of voices than ever before. We do not want the judicial appointments process to become a private club of judges and lawyers. That is why we included voices as diverse as victims and the police." On Tuesday, the body that represents Canada's federally appointed judges, the Canadian Judicial Council, expressed concern that the advisory committees that vet applicants for the bench are no longer independent because members selected by Ottawa now have a majority of votes. The committees, created in 1988 and designed to take partisan politics out of judicial appointments, vet lawyers to decide if they will be recommended as judges on Canada's superior courts. The government appoints judges from the lists provided by the committees. The committees include members appointed by provinces, provincial law societies, the Canadian Bar Association and judges. But last November, Ottawa decided to name four members, instead of three -- the fourth is drawn from the ranks of police -- and to remove the judge's vote, except in a tie. "Because the majority of voting members are now appointed by the [Justice] Minister, the advisory committees may neither be, nor seen to be, fully independent of the government. This puts in peril the concept of an independent body that advises the government on who is best qualified to be a judge," the council, headed by Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, said in a statement. "Judicial independence is not the private right of judges but the foundation of judicial impartiality and a constitutional right of all Canadians." The council also hinted that judges might pull out of the committees if it feels merit is not the criteria for appointments. And it asserted that judges have a duty to deliver decisions they feel are right even if politically unpopular. Mr. Harper said last week that his government will select judges that reflect his government's law-and-order agenda -- sparking criticisms that he was insisting judges must follow his ideological agenda. The Canadian Judicial Council statement led Liberal Leader Stephane Dion to charge that the government has heard a danger signal, and is ignoring it. "A democratic country is in trouble when the judges warn that the government is putting their independence in peril," he said in the Commons. The Globe and Mail reported last week that 16 of 33 of the non-police members of 12 judicial advisory committees chosen by Ottawa are Conservative partisans. Several of the non-partisans are vocal critics of the judiciary who argue that judges are too lax on crime or have overstepped the bounds of law to make social policy. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman