Judicial Reform

View Poll Results: Do we need to reform Canada's judicial system?
Yes 1 25.00%
No 3 75.00%
Voters: 4. You may not vote on this poll

NewGlobalOrder
#1
- Reform the Canadian Judicial Council by having twenty-five judicial commissioners sitting on the CJC: ten members would be randomly chosen from the voters list, and fifteen members appointed by the federal government, one of which would be the chairman of the commission; no judge can sit on the Council


- The CJC will now hear complaints from within the legal community, and recommendations on how to improve the legal system from the general public, and from those who work within the legal system; have the power to discipline or remove judges; hold public inquiries; request the police to investigate possible criminal actions within the legal system, or appoint investigators with special powers to do so


- The federal government can only create new courts with the approval of the CJC, and the abolition of federal courts will only take place after going to a referendum with a seventy-five percent approval


- Voters will serve a term of one year, and will not serve again until everybody on the voters list has had the opportunity to serve, and will not serve on more than
one government board at a time, and cannot have any association with government, or within the legal system


- Individuals who sit on the CJC, will receive double their current salary, and will be permitted to take a leave of absence from work for the time they serve on the CJC, without losing position or seniority


- Judicial Commissioners will only be removed if Parliament and the Judicial Commissionerís own commission approve the removal. It will require a 50% plus 1 approval from the Senate and House, and all commissioners, excluding
the commissioner(s) in question, will need to approve to have said commissioner(s) removed from the Canadian Judicial Council


- The commission will require a two-thirds vote on all decisions, with all members being present for the vote; unless before hand they swear in-front of the chairman
declaring their vote


- Law Societies will be made up of one-third elected lawyers, one-third government appointees, and one-third of people randomly chosen from the voters list


- The Prime Minister will no longer appoint Justices to the Supreme Court, nor will the Minister of Justice appoint federal judges. Instead, Parliament will set out the qualifications to become a judge or justice, and anyone who meets these qualifications, will be allowed to submit their name for nomination, to be approved by both houses of Parliament


- Create a Sentencing Jury made up of 15 people from the general public; 5 appointed by the government, and 5 judges randomly chosen, to be setup in every province and territory, to hand down sentences anywhere from probation, to life in prison


- Canadians will no longer be forced to take part in the jury system


- Offer defendants the choice of having a jury made up of the legal community


- Only the Supreme Court of Canada will be allowed to over-rule an administrative decision of the Government of Canada, or any law passed by the government, but the government will have the power to either call a referendum, or place on the ballot for the next general election, asking the voters of Canada the approval to undo the Courtís ruling


- The Supreme Court of Canada will have the power to issue a warrant for the arrest of any government official that violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, once they have refused orders from the Court to undo any violations


Have a nice weekend. Sunday is NFL Sunday/politics day for me, so I'll check back Monday. (I'm sure you all care, right?)
 
WLDB
No Party Affiliation
+1
#2  Top Rated Post
Reform, yes. This? No.
 
eh1eh
#3
Idealistic and naive.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#4
Nah. IMO, all we need to do is yank judges that hand out stupid rulings.
 
NewGlobalOrder
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

Reform, yes. This? No.

And do you have any ideas on how too? What do you not like?

Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

Nah. IMO, all we need to do is yank judges that hand out stupid rulings.

We need judicial Independence from government, but we also need the courts to be accountable. I feel creating a panel made up of the average citizens, judges and government reps, will give the right balance when handing down a sentence, instead of some lefty judge, who thinks a child molester shouldn't be punished.

Otherwise, the government has to pass down mandatory sentences, and the government should only decide what is, and isn't legal, based around a Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
 

Similar Threads

5
2
Judicial System over the Edge!
by stevek | Apr 24th, 2007