WINNIPEG - No federally appointed judge has ever been forcibly removed from the bench.
Will Lori Douglas be the first?
On Monday, nearly two years after revelations of nude Internet pictures thrust the associate chief justice under a media spotlight, an inquiry will start hearing evidence to determine whether Douglas is fit to remain a judge.
Douglas, in documents filed earlier this month, argues she shouldn't be punished for the misdeeds of her lawyer husband, Jack King, or his former client, Alex Chapman.
King has admitted trying to lure client Alex Chapman into a sexual affair with Douglas without her knowledge and posting the nude pictures on the Internet. Chapman went public in 2010, violating a $25,000 confidentiality agreement.
At issue is whether Douglas knowingly participated in the sexual harassment of Chapman and whether she failed to disclose the affair when she applied to become a judge, knowing it would reflect negatively on the judiciary.
Since its inception in 1971, the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC) has referred only nine complaints to an inquiry committee for investigation. Douglas is the first judge west of Ontario to be the subject of a judicial council inquiry.
While Parliament has yet to formally remove a judge from office, four judges in the past elected to resign after an inquiry committee recommended their ouster.
"Judges, more often than in other instances, resign before their matter even goes before an inquiry committee," CJC executive director Norman Sabourin said.
The CJC receives an average of 200 complaints a year. Only the most serious complaints, where it is determined a judge's actions could justify their removal from the bench, are referred to an inquiry committee.
Unlike a trial, an inquiry is not adversarial, Sabourin said.
"An inquiry means you try to gather information," Sabourin said. "Finding out what happened here is the purpose of a public inquiry committee. They are going to hear a lot of submissions."
Once the inquiry is concluded, the CJC has the discretion to accept or reject the inquiry committee's recommendation or send the matter back to the committee for further examination.
"The council has to give deference to the facts established by the inquiry committee, but it doesn't owe any deference to recommendations on removal," Sabourin said.
If the CJC agrees removing a judge form the bench is necessary, its recommendation is forwarded to the federal justice minister and then on to Parliament.
Internet nudie judge faces inquiry Monday | Home | Toronto Sun
Will Lori Douglas be the first?
On Monday, nearly two years after revelations of nude Internet pictures thrust the associate chief justice under a media spotlight, an inquiry will start hearing evidence to determine whether Douglas is fit to remain a judge.
Douglas, in documents filed earlier this month, argues she shouldn't be punished for the misdeeds of her lawyer husband, Jack King, or his former client, Alex Chapman.
King has admitted trying to lure client Alex Chapman into a sexual affair with Douglas without her knowledge and posting the nude pictures on the Internet. Chapman went public in 2010, violating a $25,000 confidentiality agreement.
At issue is whether Douglas knowingly participated in the sexual harassment of Chapman and whether she failed to disclose the affair when she applied to become a judge, knowing it would reflect negatively on the judiciary.
Since its inception in 1971, the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC) has referred only nine complaints to an inquiry committee for investigation. Douglas is the first judge west of Ontario to be the subject of a judicial council inquiry.
While Parliament has yet to formally remove a judge from office, four judges in the past elected to resign after an inquiry committee recommended their ouster.
"Judges, more often than in other instances, resign before their matter even goes before an inquiry committee," CJC executive director Norman Sabourin said.
The CJC receives an average of 200 complaints a year. Only the most serious complaints, where it is determined a judge's actions could justify their removal from the bench, are referred to an inquiry committee.
Unlike a trial, an inquiry is not adversarial, Sabourin said.
"An inquiry means you try to gather information," Sabourin said. "Finding out what happened here is the purpose of a public inquiry committee. They are going to hear a lot of submissions."
Once the inquiry is concluded, the CJC has the discretion to accept or reject the inquiry committee's recommendation or send the matter back to the committee for further examination.
"The council has to give deference to the facts established by the inquiry committee, but it doesn't owe any deference to recommendations on removal," Sabourin said.
If the CJC agrees removing a judge form the bench is necessary, its recommendation is forwarded to the federal justice minister and then on to Parliament.
Internet nudie judge faces inquiry Monday | Home | Toronto Sun
