Harper nominates Justice Thomas Cromwell

[Argus]

And that has been superior in every way?

Actually yes. The only problem is that in the US every judicial appointment winds up being a contest about whether they're pro-life or pro-choice.

[jdobbin]

Actually yes. The only problem is that in the US every judicial appointment winds up being a contest about whether they're pro-life or pro-choice.

Think it has been more than that but you're welcome to that opinion.

[cybercoma]

My choice for picking Supremes would be based on the US model. At least then everybody has some idea of the background of the candidate.

The Canadian Bar Association addresses the US model in the link I posted earlier. I'd suggest checking it out to understand the limitations of the American system.

http://www.cba.org/CBA/submissions/pdf/04-10-03-eng.pdf

[Rue]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

So much for the selection committee in the House of Commons being involved in selection. Another broken Harper promise.

Bottom line I think the selection committee in the House of Commons is a cheap rip off of the American system. Who is kidding who this committee is just a photo op for idiot MP's to pass gas and to make themselves look good. There is a system that picks these Judges and its based on a system that tries NOT to be political like the U.S. but pick Judges based on their jurisprudential competency. The Judges picked at the Supreme Court of Canada level are usually bilingual and have a solid reputation as an Appeals Judge or in rare cases like Judge Sopinka who had such a prominent role in so many important cases as a litigator or say Bora Laskin a distnguished legal academic, they are picked from Senior courts based on a protocol of trying to pick them from the regional areas of Canada, a sufficient number of Quebec Judges to handle civil law cases and of course prererably bilingual. There is almost always no contraversy as far as the legal bars are concerned when these Judges are picked. Yes there has been an attempt to deliberately look for women and one day hopefully an aboriginal Supreme Court Judge or a visible minority Judge and in that sense that would be political but not because of their partisan believes but because of the symbolic effect.

I do not doubt once again Harper showed what an arrogant dictator he was just shoving this guy in but the practical reality is he can and all PM's have, and this sudden need for the cosmetic MP committee is useless.

The current system chooses him or her for their legal competence first and foremost and then of course the PM is given the list and has the prerogative to choose someone he thinks is more sympathetic to his own political views.

Harper is the first PM to openly try interfere politically with the appointment process and actually show contempt for the independence of the judiciary system trying to turn his own position into a Presidential one in trying to influence the Judges' decisions, but the Judges have ignored him. Our legal system is based on the British model, not the US model and so Harper's attempt to try be Presidential and try intimidate courts into making certain decisions based on politics hasn't and can not work.

If a politician doesn't like a court decision the recourse is to pass new legislation as long as its not unconstitutional and you end up like dummy George Bush in the US who kept passing legislation in response to court decisions to try get around those decisions but kept repeating the same constitutional illegalities.

This Judge in particular is a no brainer. They needed an Atlantic region Judge and necessity requires whenever possible they are bilingual. He was both and he has rendered solid appeal cases. No legal bar is going to be upset with the choice. The guy is competent. Now whether he has strong political views that might colour some of his decisions I do not know. I defer to Nova Scotia litigators who have been before him. Its hard to say from the kinds of cases he has done from what I have read.

So in summary yah I think Harper is a rude putz, but in the end, we are no worse off. So I share your annoyance but would say in the long run it won't make a diff and me I think the Canadian way of appointing Judges is far superior to the US way and no I do not want a political circus appointing them.

Edited September 7, 2008 by Rue

[fellowtraveller]

Heaven forbid that our legal system be dominated by legal professionals. Thats who I would trust with the process. In general people don't know enough about what their voting upon to make an informed decision. Its our right to vote in politicians, but politics should be kept out of the judicial branch as much as possible.

Try complaining to your local Law Society, who are entrusted with policing themselves, then tell me there is no element of self-interest. Virtually everything is done behind close doors, by and for lawyers. Sweet deal for them. It is a myth propagated by several professions, that their work is so arcane or complex that only they can manage themselves.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that handing over the SC process to them would be any different.

And you have it backwards on the judicial branch. Politicians are elected and make the laws. Judges are appointed and interpret those laws. Our SC forgets that frequentlym, usually encouraged by the govt.

The votoing for SC judges should not be done by 'people that don't know enough' , it should be done by our elected representatives in Ottawa. It is their job, or shpould be, to get informed.

It is impossibl;e to keep poltics out entirely. What I would like to see is more transparency.

[Smallc]

And you have it backwards on the judicial branch. Politicians are elected and make the laws. Judges are appointed and interpret those laws. Our SC forgets that frequentlym, usually encouraged by the govt.

Just because you see it that way, it doesn't make it so.

[jdobbin]

So in summary yah I think Harper is a rude putz, but in the end, we are no worse off. So I share your annoyance but would say in the long run it won't make a diff and me I think the Canadian way of appointing Judges is far superior to the US way and no I do not want a political circus appointing them.

I don't disagree that the way we appoint judges is not as bad as many think.

The problem is that many Conservative party members have been at war with the judiciary as if they are sole cause of the problems rather than poorly worded or wrong headed legislation they introduced in the first place.

Harper was the person who put this selection committee in place but then had his PMO write up a 200 page manual on how to make committees dysfunctional. It is quite confounding.

Personally, I'd rather the selection start outside Parliament but even there, Harper shows what a control freak he is about who is on the committee.