April 22, 2008
The unexpected retirement of Justice Michel Bastarache leaves Prime Minister Harper with a second appointment to make to the Supreme Court. Last time, he played it safe and appointed someone to replace Justice Major from the shortlist prepared by the Martin government, but this time he has a completely free hand. The politics involved in such appointments — the weighing of region, gender, professional background (academic or practice or judiciary), race/ethnicity, religion, and dare I say it, party affiliation, provide a broad field for speculation and punditry. So what’s in the cards?
The widespread assumption that an Atlantic Canadian will be appointed to replace Justice Bastarache is based only on convention and not on any legislative provision. Yet regional representation has been one of the most unshakeable traditions associated with the Court, so both inertia and politics suggest that Harper will not choose to violate this tradition. Following tradition will not likely gain the PM any votes east of Quebec, but breaking with it would surely be seen as a slap in the face to the region.
Intra-regional politics will be the more interesting aspect of this appointment. Newfoundland and Labrador obviously has a strong claim to an appointment. No one from the province has ever sat on the high court in the nearly sixty years since it joined Confederation. Heck, two Toronto lawyers were incensed enough about this to write an article in the Globe and Mail in 2004 urging that PM Martin depart from convention and appoint a Newfoundlander to one of the (non-Atlantic) vacancies then pending.
The spoiler for aspiring Newfoundlanders is the continuing Steve and Danny imbroglio. If the PM acts true to form – i.e., punitive and vindictive – he will allow his annoyance with the province to spoil its chances for a Supreme Court seat for another decade or two. However, this could be his chance to present a more statesmanlike face to Canadians. Appointing a Newfoundlander will not gain Harper many votes in the province, but it may play well elsewhere in Canada.
So who’s in the running on the Rock? First of all, not the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal, Clyde Wells. This PM is not going to appoint a former Liberal premier to the Supreme Court. And the man will be 71 this year, leaving him only four years in office. That would be a real slap to the province: let’s appoint someone we know will only be there a few years, then you can wait sixty years for your next turn.
There are some impressive candidates on the Newfoundland courts. Leo Barry has a breadth of experience that makes him attractive: LL.M. at Yale, practice in St. John’s, professor at Dal Law School in the 1970s, chair of the provincial Labour Relations Board, MLA and cabinet minister, and his French skills are reported to be up to par. His iconoclastic record of having run for the leadership of both the provincial Conservatives and the Liberals at different times, however, probably nixes his chances in Ottawa.
Derek Green has had a McLachlinesque career, starting on the Trial Division, being promoted to the Court of Appeal, and then going back to the Trial Division as Chief Justice. A Rhodes Scholar with no obvious prior political connections, Chief Justice Green conducted a sensitive inquiry last year into the alleged misuse of MLA expense accounts.
Michael Harrington’s name comes up frequently. He was appointed to the Trial Division last year by the Harper government so he is a known quantity. He has a very high reputation among Newfoundland lawyers but whether he has the royal jelly for a Supreme Court appointment is less clear, and his French skills are unknown.
There are some capable women candidates on the Newfoundland courts, including Gail Welch, appointed to the Trial Division in 1999 and recently elevated to the Court of Appeal, but something tells me that Stephen Harper is not the man to give the Supreme Court of Canada a female majority. The opportunity to ameliorate the gender gap in his support must be tempting, but the chance of alienating his own core voters is probably too high to risk it.
But what if Newfoundland is passed over yet again? It hardly seems possible that New Brunswick would score a hat trick on the Supreme Court, and it is unlikely that the PM will turn to Prince Edward Island with its tiny talent pool. Don’t believe what you read, by the way, about P.E.I. never having had a judge on the Supreme Court – Louis Henry Davies was appointed from Laurier’s cabinet to the Court in 1901, became chief justice of Canada in 1918, and died in office in 1924.
That leaves Nova Scotia, but it has to be said in all honesty that the province is not bursting with Supreme Court-calibre talent at the moment. Don’t get me wrong: there are lots of highly competent and professional judges sitting on the Nova Scotia bench. But the bar for the Supreme Court is higher than that. If you are looking for someone with the vision of Justice Bastarache himself, the deep humanity of Gerald La Forest, the literary eloquence of Ian Binnie, the analytical sharpness of Beverley McLachlin, or the high intelligence of Louis LeBel, there are really only two names that come to mind.
Tom Cromwell was a lawyer’s lawyer, a professor’s professor, and is now a judge’s judge. He knows the Court well, having been the executive assistant to Chief Justice Lamer for three years in the early 1990s. During his decade on the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal he has produced judgments in many areas of law which are models of clarity, reasoning, and just results. Although not given to black-letter interpretation, Cromwell is not a visionary social engineer either, which would be reassuring to the PM.
Joel Fichaud did quite a bit of high-profile constitutional and administrative law while in practice, including representing the successful appellants at the Supreme Court in the Doucet-Boudreau case on Charter remedies. He was appointed to the Court of Appeal in the fall of 2003, and in both his decisions and his oral exchanges with counsel he displays an exceptional analytical vigour and acuity. Both Cromwell and Fichaud possess the French-language skills required to participate actively in argument in that language, a factor that may be the Achilles heel for some Newfoundland candidates.
But the real question that faces Stephen Harper is this: will he seize this opportunity to remedy the historic under-representation of Dalhousie Law graduates on the Supreme Court of Canada? Our only alumna on the top court has been Bertha Wilson. (Roland Ritchie did his law at Oxford.) It’s time for Peter MacKay to stop prancing around in Afghanistan and get down to business on behalf of his alma mater. If he and Loyola Hearn gang up to force Harper to appoint a Dal Law grad from Newfoundland to the Supreme Court, it’s honorary degrees all round.
- Philip Girard is a Professor at Dalhousie Law School, and the Editor of the Dalhousie Law Journal
4 Comments
Who can resist inside baseball? I would appreciate – and enjoy – the efforts of Prof Girard to handicap this important appointment even if I weren’t a Dal grad. And this particular professor, who’s made no small contribution to both the academic and administrative sides of Dalhousie Law School, (and beyond) is well picked to throw a game-opener.
Let me call one ball though. While speculation on both the PM’s political temperament and temper has rightly or wrongly become its own popular national past-time, to suggest that the Williams-Harper affair would be allowed to get the better of the appointment of a Supreme Court of Canada judge is a pitch probably a few degrees north of the strike zone and a little west of fair.
There’s nothing to suggest that the Prime Minister’s inclination is to treat appointments of this nature lightly and there’s nothing to suggest that he would see the two as mixed. The evidence is strongly to the contrary: the appointment of Marshall Rothstein came in a process that was perhaps less than what was hoped, but for this country, it was no small innovation. And, whatever its shortcomings from any particular model of the ideal someone might choose, real or apprehended, no one could call it a process designed to enhance secrecy or to clinch control.
But, that ball called, back to the game:
Are there no Atlantic Canadian women appropriate to the post? How does the record of Cromwell J.A. compare to that of Leo Barry for example? On the Charter? In commercial litigation? In criminal matters? Do PEI judges not stand out because the province is small and their work not circulated in larger contexts– some of the decisions coming out of that province’s court seem more than substantial? How would a new Atlantic Canadian relate to the legacies of LaForest and Basterache? Do Atlantic Canadians bring anything discernibly distinct to the Court? And speaking of Rothstein, J. is he making a qualitative difference on the big court? How would new appointees affect/deflect any tendency that could be teased out of his appointment or record?urt.
You can smell the hot dogs and the popcorn.
Play ball!
I'm pretty sure it's not going to be Justice Tom Cromwell. Harper was... not a fan of Lamer C.J.C. The "executive assistant to Chief Justice Lamer" on his résumé is a bit like "executed assistant to the President of Burger King" when applying for a job at PETA.
I think it will be a woman. Harper will love to be the man to make the first majority female High Court in the commonwealth. I don't think it would alienate his core supporters either. Rather the reverse, I'm sure it would thrill them: "How can we be sexist. We put a woman on the Supreme Court!"
That's why I think it's going to be Justice Margaret Cameron. From Newfoudland, appointed by Conservatives, speaks some French and – of course – is a woman.
Kudos to Prof. Girard for his acerbic witticisms and on-point critique - but what you boys all need to learn to play is politics, not ball!
I also am a Dal Grad (and a U of S Grad, and a UBC grad - from back when it still HAD an animal science department in a real agriculture faculty) BUT I have lived and worked in TO, Ottawa, Edmonton, Calgary & Vancouver and KNOW you have to research and learn to play the system.
I was one of the original members of the Reform, then Alliance, and the Conservative parties - even an active member of Diane A's board for many years. My daughter (who attended Dal Law as an infant with me) has been dragged to meet Preston Manning and Steven Harper, as my parents brought me to meet Dief the chief.
As soon as I heard the former Prof. Tom Cromwell was a candidate, I began campaigning and lobbying the Conservative members, the party insiders, and Harper himself for his serious consideration (just as I have been lobbying all along, for Harper to bulk up his cadre of legal advisers). There is no way I have the volume of ego necessary to claim credit for this "victory", but I do strongly believe that if you JUST KEEP ASKING AND ASKING AND ASKING AND ASKING they will eventually respond, if for no other reason than to just SHUT YOU UP!!!
I am now the mother of a 19 year old - believe me, I KNOW the effectiveness of this form of "lobbying"!
This is the problem with the Internet, Jacob. Now everyone gets to point out how wrong you were. 🙂