A parliamentary committee is badly split over altering the appointment process for Supreme Court justices, but it has agreed on one key issue: creating a committee of eminent jurists, leaders of the bar and members of Parliament to submit a short list of judicial candidates.
A long-awaited report from the four parties represented on the Commons justice committee will in effect be four separate reports, sources said. It could be released as early as today.
A key portion written by Liberal members appears to fall short of opposition demands that Supreme Court candidates be subject to parliamentary review as part of their selection process.
Another element that has left Bloc Québécois and Conservative committee members disenchanted is the exclusion of provincial governments from any say in the list of candidates that goes to the minister of justice and the prime minister.
“I don't think the Liberals are going far enough,” Bloc MP Richard Marceau said in an interview yesterday. “Jean Charest, the least demanding Quebec premier in recent history, is asking for provinces to be able to submit a list, and the federal Liberals are not even willing to give him that. It means that Prime Minister Paul Martin's talk about more power for the provinces is just rhetoric.”
The panel of eminent people that would decide on a short list is likely to include judges, the provincial chief justice and representatives of the bar from the province from which the new judge will be appointed. The appointee will be chosen from their list.
All parties have conceded that the Constitution gives the Prime Minister the last word on an appointment. Debate in the justice committee quickly settled on how lists of candidates are drawn up and researched, and whether candidates ought to be exposed to questioning from MPs before or after selection.
“The Prime Minister will have the last word, but I feel the province should have the first word,” Mr. Marceau said yesterday. He said the committee didn't take long to “slam the door” on the idea of candidates being grilled in public, as they are for U.S. Supreme Court appointments.
Last year, Mr. Martin promised to give Parliament more of a say in the appointment of the justices. Madam Justice Louise Arbour and Mr. Justice Frank Iacobucci unexpectedly announced their imminent retirements from the Supreme Court several weeks ago, putting pressure on Mr. Martin to come through quickly with his changes to the process.
When the retiring justices are replaced, Justice Minister Irwin Cotler is likely to appear before the committee to explain how the replacements were chosen.
Conservative committee member Kevin Sorenson said yesterday that it was unfortunate, but not surprising, that the committee ended up unable to reach a consensus. “Unfortunately, committees are controlled by the government party,” he said. “What they want, in this report, is what they got.”
Mr. Sorenson said it is particularly senseless to deprive provincial governments of an opportunity to compile a list of candidates from their province.NDP committee member Lorne Nystrom said yesterday he could not discuss the report before its release. However, his party's general position is that government figures involved in the selection process should appear before a parliamentary committee to explain the reasons for their choice before the candidate is formally appointed.
