Harper Appoints His Two Judges

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
PM taps Ontario judges Karakatsanis, Moldaver for Supreme Court

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has moved to fill two Supreme Court of Canada vacancies by nominating Mr. Justice Michael Moldaver, an outspoken Ontario appellate judge with vast experience in criminal law, and a former senior civil servant – Madam Justice Andromake Karakatsanis.

A judge who typically does not believe in striking down legislation, Judge Moldaver has publicly decried a proliferation of litigation under the Charter of Rights. Both factors make him an ideal nominee for a government with an ambitious law and order agenda.

While neither appointee comes as a surprise, both are likely to come under criticism for certain perceived vulnerabilities.

Having spent her career as a top civil servant, Judge Karakatsanis has vast administrative experience but little in the realities of a law practice. Her career on the bench has been short and she has produced little in the way of significant or memorable jurisprudence. Her nomination is also likely to come under fire because of her close connections to powerful Conservatives – most notably, Finance Minister James Flaherty, with whom she worked closely when he was Ontario’s attorney-general.

Judge Moldaver’s inability to speak French is sure to provoke a degree of controversy, as will a public stance he has taken against courtroom strategies he perceives as wasting court resources and bringing the Charter of Rights into disrepute.

The defence bar accuses Judge Moldaver of harbouring overinflated fears about violent crime and inaccurately portraying police as handcuffed by evidentiary rules.

His mission to fight courtroom inefficiencies commenced about five years ago, when Judge Moldaver lashed out at long Charter motions and accused some defence counsel of “pilfering precious legal aid funds,” and of hijacking trials that end up in long-running constitutional battles over evidence.

Coming at a time when defence counsel felt they have been scapegoated for the legal-aid system’s continuing woes, the defence bar denounced Judge Moldaver’s criticisms as an unmeasured rant that was replete with inaccuracies and false stereotypes.

On the Court of Appeal, he frequently sits on high profile or complex cases. Earlier this year, for example, he opted to deny doctors their wish to unilaterally pull the plug on a patient they deem beyond medical help.

Judge Moldaver’s tough-on-crime reputation is partly founded in his approach to punishment. Last year, for example, he was drastically increasing the sentences of the a group of terrorists convicted under new anti-terrorism legislation.

More recently, he ratcheted up the sentence of a man convicted of luring a 12-year-old girl over the Internet, a welcome decision to the Harper government that created the law.

“The offence of luring carries very real dangers – innocent children being seduced and sexually assaulted or even worse, kidnapped, sexually abused and possibly killed,” Judge Moldaver said in the case, R v Woodward.

At the same time, however, Judge Moldaver sometimes opts for leniency in cases where individuals with no history of criminality make uncharacteristic errors of judgment.

In an important case last spring, for example, he took the position that mothers who kill their infants while in the grips of a mental disturbance deserve leniency instead of automatic life sentences for murder the Crown had sought.

Judge Binnie had been appointed directly from a thriving practice at a Bay Street law firm. The fact that the court will now have no lawyers coming direct from practice will be a cause of dismay to those who believe the Court tends to be out of touch with the realities of practice.

Judge Charron was one of the court’s only criminal law experts, while Judge Binnie acquired considerable expertise in the area. The fact that only one of their replacements is steeped in criminal law constitutes a modest setback for the court.

In legal circles, there will be considerable shock that a front-runner for the job – Ontario Court of Appeal Judge Robert Sharpe – was not one of the nominees. A perception that he too often takes a tough line against the federal crown attorneys may have been his undoing.

PM taps Ontario judges Karakatsanis, Moldaver for Supreme Court
 
Last edited:

The Old Medic

Council Member
May 16, 2010
1,330
2
38
The World
Sounds like Mr. Harper is shaping the Court with non-activist Judges, who actually believe that the law as written has real meaning.

I am simply amazed at those that believe that there is something wrong with a Judge who defers to the legislators for the meaning of laws, instead of inventing new rights out of the air.

As to Criminal Sentences, it is about time that the Supreme Court, as well as Appalate Courts, begin taking a hard line with criminals.

Frankly, Canada has been so lenient with criminals, they they have been encouraging more outrageous crime, rather than telling criminals that this kind of behavior will no longer be accepted.

Anyone that "lures" an underaged child into a sexual situation should simply be sentenced to a minimal period of 50 years in prison, without any possibility of release before the full sentence is completes. And they should NOT be afforded "special custody", but should be forced to live in the general prison population, where they will learn what it is like to be sexually abused.

I find it difficult to understand why anyone would object to these Judges, unless they truly believe that criminals should be coddled.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
As to Criminal Sentences, it is about time that the Supreme Court, as well as Appalate Courts, begin taking a hard line with criminals.


That's true:

In an important case last spring, for example, he took the position that mothers who kill their infants while in the grips of a mental disturbance deserve leniency instead of automatic life sentences for murder the Crown had sought.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Sounds like Mr. Harper is shaping the Court with non-activist Judges, who actually believe that the law as written has real meaning.

I am simply amazed at those that believe that there is something wrong with a Judge who defers to the legislators for the meaning of laws, instead of inventing new rights out of the air.

As to Criminal Sentences, it is about time that the Supreme Court, as well as Appalate Courts, begin taking a hard line with criminals.

Frankly, Canada has been so lenient with criminals, they they have been encouraging more outrageous crime, rather than telling criminals that this kind of behavior will no longer be accepted.

Anyone that "lures" an underaged child into a sexual situation should simply be sentenced to a minimal period of 50 years in prison, without any possibility of release before the full sentence is completes. And they should NOT be afforded "special custody", but should be forced to live in the general prison population, where they will learn what it is like to be sexually abused.

I find it difficult to understand why anyone would object to these Judges, unless they truly believe that criminals should be coddled.


I am amazed that people do not understand that the SCOC interprets the law – and if found to be in conflict with shall we say a person’s Charter Rights – Well that is interference by the courts – Not that the law was poorly crafted.
Then when the SCOC rules on a case and they agree with the ruling – Why the SCOC is doing their job.
 

Omicron

Privy Council
Jul 28, 2010
1,694
3
38
Vancouver
As to Criminal Sentences, it is about time that the Supreme Court, as well as Appalate Courts, begin taking a hard line with criminals.
That's true:

That means you are saying that harsh penalties are what makes you work.

Frankly, the way things are going, I'm seeing a way for an international free enterprise endeavor to build some rockets to build a space station to colonize another planet and get the heck away from this dumb rock.

Pretend you're a kid in elementary, say around third grade, and the system of freedom back-lashed to let a five-year old be boss?

The five year-old would probably be too stupid to notice the wastefulness of time he was doing to society, happy just to be in charge, but what would the reaction be if he were to be outed as a puppet of Lucifer? Would he act surprised?
 
Last edited:

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Part of the agenda? This shouldn't be surprising. It's a shame though, that the government can influence an agenda on law and order. There should a more objective way of appointing judges based on performance and committee approval.

--

With three more retirements on the way by 2015, Mr. Harper has an opportunity to craft a court that keeps its hands off his legislative priorities, including the Tories’ tough-on-crime agenda.

Judge Moldaver and Judge Karakatsanis are seen as relatively conservative judges who will steer clear of using the Charter of Rights to strike down legislation.

“These are clearly small-c conservatives and they will do little to change the general direction of the court – other than to consolidate its right-centre orientation,” said Allan Hutchinson, a law professor at York University’s Osgoode Hall Law School.

“Their nominations will go through, but Karakatsanis could be challenged as she has little to recommend her as a Supreme Court of Canada judge, other than her political connections,” Prof. Hutchinson said. “She has no real judicial experience and has done little to make her mark on the Ontario Court of Appeal.”.


Judge Moldaver, 63, would become the fourth Jewish judge to the current court. Prior to the 1970s, it had never had a Jewish member.

His criminal-law experience will help fill a void created when Mr. Justice Ian Binnie and Madam Justice Louise Charron retired.

“He brings to the courts a law-and-order orientation that will not always play out the way some Conservatives might hope,” Prof. Hutchinson remarked.

Judge Moldaver has been vocal in his criticism of prosecutors and defence lawyers who waste the time of the courts, upsetting many in the defence bar.


Harper's picks - The Globe and Mail
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,346
556
113
59
Alberta
Anything that works to hire the most objective judges with the least political bias.

How is following the law using political bias? As pointed out in another thread two Harper appointed judges ruled in favor of insite.

Even though I don't agree with their ruling, it seems pretty unbiased too me.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
How is following the law using political bias? As pointed out in another thread two Harper appointed judges ruled in favor of insite.

Even though I don't agree with their ruling, it seems pretty unbiased too me.

The judges were deliberately chosen "small-c" conservatives - which is fine under the current model.

I could think of a committee that would elect a judge based on the "reasonable person" standard - which is a notable standard in law theory. Of course it's malleable, and you can have left or right leaning judges, but the committee would be bi-partisan, so whatever leaning would just be the luck of the draw.

In the current case, obviously Harper's going to choose judges that move forward with his agenda. I'm sure if the NDP or Liberals were in power, they would do the same, so I'm not blaming Harper.

It's just the way the system is set up.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,346
556
113
59
Alberta
The judges were deliberately chosen "small-c" conservatives - which is fine under the current model.

I could think of a committee that would elect a judge based on the "reasonable person" standard - which is a notable standard in law theory. Of course it's malleable, and you can have left or right leaning judges, but the committee would be bi-partisan, so whatever leaning would just be the luck of the draw.

In the current case, obviously Harper's going to choose judges that move forward with his agenda. I'm sure if the NDP or Liberals were in power, they would do the same, so I'm not blaming Harper.

It's just the way the system is set up.

An elected court can have a whole set of issues too.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
An elected court can have a whole set of issues too.

I wouldn't doubt it.

Maybe I'll do some research on territories that separate state and judiciary. I'm pretty sure the presidential model (as opposed to the parliamentary one) has a more segregated system between the executive and legislative branches.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,346
556
113
59
Alberta
I wouldn't doubt it.

Maybe I'll do some research on territories that separate state and judiciary. I'm pretty sure the presidential model (as opposed to the parliamentary one) has a more segregated system between the executive and legislative branches.

The American model has a lot of problems. I'm all for a democratic system, but I don't want a judge out stumping and making promises to get elected.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
The American model has a lot of problems. I'm all for a democratic system, but I don't want a judge out stumping and making promises to get elected.

Is it just judges promoting themselves?

I mean, they're not politicians. What do they promise other than greater justice?