Message from the Co-Chair
By Hon. John Menzies
Once we become judges, we sacrifice in many ways our ability to publicly justify our role in society. The Canadian Bar Association deserves our active support and participation for having taken on that role on our behalf.
The LeSage-Code Report on Large and Complex Criminal Case Procedures
By Hon. Sophie Bourque
The authors’ analysis and recommendations might serve to inspire change in your respective jurisdictions. The following is a very brief synopsis of their imposing work.
Might we have a voir dire?
By Guy Joubert
Ladies and gentlemen of the bench, I wonder if we could have a quiet word? I would like to speak with you, fairly and frankly, about the CBA and its representation of judges.
Honourable mentions
By Hon. Sophie Bourque
Every year, Canadian judges prove to be valuable members of their community and often receive recognition for their contributions. This year, we asked Chief Judges/Justices to help us spread the good news.
“A judge is a judge is a judge…”
By Lcol Jean-Guy Perron
So wrote the Honourable Claire L’Heureux-Dubé, Q.C., in her addenda to the 2008 Report on the Military Judges Compensation Committee. Much like Canadian criminal justice, Canadian military justice and its judiciary have seen much change in the past 30 years.
The rule of law
By Bernard Amyot
The rule of law is a universal and fundamental value, which all lawyers must defend. This is a responsibility, a duty, which cannot be severed from the privilege of practising our profession.
Hon. Thomas A. Cromwell a fine addition to the Supreme Court of Canada
By Hon. Jill Hamilton
By now I imagine the members of the Canada’s highest court have realized how well suited the newest member of their court, the Honourable Thomas A. Cromwell, is for his new position.
The rewards of international volunteer work: a personal perspective
By Hon. Terry Shupe
For the past several years, I have made toys for free distribution to children in Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Croatia and Bosnia. I participated in the construction of houses and communities in Tangalle, Sri Lanka, and more recently I have been working to support construction of a trades training facility in that region.
Canadian Legal Conference, in Dublin: Aug. 13-18 2009
In addition to the Judges’ Forum reception and the Forum’s Annual Business Meeting, the Judges’ Forum CLE will be on offer at the CLC in Dublin – a special panel that will address the human rights issues that have arisen as a result of counter-terrorism measures that result both from international and national law.
Call for Nominations
The Canadian Judges’ Forum is now accepting nominations for three positions on its Executive Committee for the 2009-2010 term: one Secretary-Treasurer and two Members-at-Large.
Canadian Judges’ Forum
A list of the Forum’s Executive Members.
2009 CAPCJ Conference - Sept. 23 to 26 - Calgary, Alberta
Please click on this link for more information: CAPCJ National Conference.
Message from the Co-Chair
By Hon. John Menzies
I must admit that when I was approached by Madam Justice Elizabeth Hughes to join the Executive of the Judges’ Forum of the Canadian Bar Association, I was unsure of what the Forum did and why they should want me as a member of the Executive. Although I am still wondering why they would want me as a member of the Executive, I am glad to have participated in the hard working group that manages this conference of the CBA. I encourage all of you to consider becoming a member of the Judges’ Forum Executive.
The Forum is a volunteer organization representing all levels of the judiciary from provincial trial courts on up to the Supreme Court of Canada. As a result, one finds representatives of three levels of Canadian courts working together on one Executive (Naturally, the SCC is not normally represented on our executive due to their already heavy work commitments). Reflecting the national perspective of the CBA, the Executive is made up of members of the judiciary from all regions of the country. Although this makes it difficult to arrange appropriate meeting times, one quickly becomes aware of how court and government policies can have highly beneficial effects in one area of the country and have unintended effects in another.
The Forum also plans and presents educational programs at the annual CBA CLC. While there are always many excellent programs at each annual meeting, the Judges’ Forum attempts to focus on presenting a program which addresses the judicial side of the issue. In the past, we have addressed relations with the media, the role of the judiciary in times of crisis, the regional differences and challenges for security in the courtroom, and other topics of particular interest to judicial members of the CBA.
Finally, and in my view of the utmost importance, the Judges’ Forum serves as a support for the CBA as a whole. Having participated in the Forum for the past number of years, I believe membership in the CBA should be mandatory for judges. Since the 1980’s, it has become politically fashionable for politicians to criticize judges every time the public has a complaint about the judicial system. Ministers of Justice no longer see it as their role to defend the judiciary. We have just one friend prepared to stand up and defend our role in society. That friend is without question the CBA. Becoming a member is one way we can show our continuing interest and support for the CBA. By being active in the Judges’ Forum, we can continue to support the works of this influential association.
Once we become judges, we sacrifice in many ways our ability to publicly justify our role in society. The Canadian Bar Association has taken on that role on our behalf. They deserve our active support and participation. Join up! We look forward to working with all of you.
The LeSage-Code Report on Large and Complex Criminal Case Procedures
By Hon. Sophie Bourque
In February 2008, the Attorney General of Ontario asked the Honourable Patrick LeSage and Professor Michael Code 1 to review the procedure for complex criminal cases. He asked them to identify the problems and find potential solutions.
To discharge their mandate, they prepared a preliminary discussion document, and then met with defence counsel, Crown counsel, judges, Ontario Legal Aid officials, police force officials and others who play a role in large and complex criminal cases. They also analyzed four mega-trials which had already been heard by the Ontario Court of Appeal and studied the relevant case law. A second consultation document was then distributed and round table discussions were held with the various parties to discuss the proposed solutions.
The result of their work is set out in the Report on Large and Complex Criminal Case Procedures, delivered to the Attorney General in November 2008. The report, available in both official languages, can be found on the Attorney General of Ontario’s website.
Criminal procedure is at once a matter of law and culture. Therefore, the situations described by the authors or the solutions proposed may not be relevant in every province.
However, the authors’ analysis and recommendations might serve to inspire you in your respective jurisdictions. The following is a very brief synopsis of their imposing work.
The mega-trial phenomenon
Although the mega-trial may not be a completely new development, the situation seems to have deteriorated in recent years. This observation has, led some leading justice system participants to publicly voice their concerns. 2
The authors identify three defining elements which collectively have contributed to the emergence of the mega-trial. These are the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the reform of evidence law by the Supreme Court of Canada (for example, the evolution of hearsay rules toward a principled approach or the confession rule) and finally the addition of many new complex provisions to the Criminal Code and other related statutes (for example, provisions on criminal organizations adopted in 1997 and amended in 2001, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the Anti-Terrorism Act). The authors note that the players in these three developments, initiated by either the courts themselves or by elected lawmakers, might not have foreseen the combined impact they would have on the criminal trial process.
The authors juxtapose three cultural elements with these judicial events. First, they note that it is especially the preliminary proceedings that have snowballed, while, paradoxically, the inquiry phase of the trial as such remains relatively simple. They find that the system has not adapted well to this reality and has taken a rather accommodating attitude, allowing preliminary proceedings to lag on for several months, with adjournments being too easily granted. Second, with the avalanche of new developments, the system has become prone to error. Consequently, the fear of making a mistake has caused both lawyers and judges to proceed in an overly cautious manner. The final cultural aspect is the escalating animosity between the attorneys. In this adversarial system of ours, these important amendments have created numerous opportunities for conflict.
Focus areas
The authors identify five key areas where they recommend changes be made.
- Disclosure of the relevant and non-privileged information in the Crown’s possession, and the relationship between the police and the Crown at the pre-charge stage (Chapter 3);
- Judicial case management, especially at the pre-trial stage (Chapter 4);
- Legal Aid practices in setting the budget and then managing and overseeing counsel’s conduct of long complex cases (Chapter 5);
- Advising, directing and, where necessary, disciplining, individual Crown counsel and individual defence counsel who conduct long complex cases (Chapter 6); and
- Managing the unrepresented accused in long complex cases (Chapter 7).
They make 41 recommendations. It would be too lengthy to reproduce them all here, but these are the main ones.
Recommendations
As regards the disclosure of evidence, the authors recommend greater collaboration between the Crown and the police in preparing the communication (1 and 2), standardization of the communication (3), compulsory transcription of interviews and intercepts (5), the fixing of deadlines for the communication of evidence (7) and management of the defence’s extrinsic requests (8).
As for case management, the authors make the following recommendations. Speedy appointment of the trial judge (9), an amendment to s. 645 C.C. to provide for a judge other than the judge who eventually hears the evidence at trial to rule on pre-trial motions (10), and appointment of judges with expertise in criminal cases for mega-trials (13). They recommend making the most of pre-trial conferences, even before the preliminary inquiry, and to have an “exit pre-trial conference” to immediately identify the points at issue (14, 15, 16). They emphasize that the administering judge should make every effort to encourage reasonable admissions and should mediate in that regard (18). They also suggest having s. 38 of the Evidence Act amended to limit interlocutory appeals and the attendant delays in terrorism cases.
Legal aid systems differ across the country. But it is interesting to note that the authors recommend enhancing the fees paid in these cases along with the creation of a list of eligible lawyers that would contain the names of only the most qualified counsel for this type of case (21, 28). They also recommend that Ontario’s legal aid bureau more closely oversee the work done by defence attorneys (22 to 27).
As to the fourth area, attorney conduct, the authors recommend having only the most able and respected lawyers act for both the Crown and the Defence in such cases (29). They suggest that both be supervised to prevent futile proceedings (30, 31, 32) and that the Law Society of Upper Canada establish a re-invigorated mentoring program (33). In addition, there should be active participation by the judiciary to promote a high level of professionalism (34, 38) and the Law Society should revise the sanctions imposed to make them more severe where misconduct seriously disrupts the administration of justice (35, 36). Their final recommendation in this area is to open up informal channels of communication between defence counsel and Crown prosecutors, such as joint education programs to revive the traditions of collegiality and respect in criminal practice (37).
Last, concerning a self-represented accused, they recommend that the judge appoint a friend of the court who would act on behalf of the accused to ensure a fair trial (40-41).
Conclusion
Criminal justice seems to be at a crossroads. This is a report that will definitely be useful and will inspire everyone with an interest in seeing our system become adapted to the new realities.
1. Whom we wish to congratulate for his May 20 appointment to the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario.
2. For instance, Chief Justice McLachlin, speech to the Empire Clubon
March 8, 2007 titled "The Challenges We Face."
Might we have a voir dire?
By Guy Joubert
President, Canadian Bar Association
|
Guy Joubert President, Canadian Bar Association | |
Ladies and gentlemen of the bench—I wonder if we could have a quiet word? If I were a journalist, I would say that this was an “off-the-record” conversation. If I were to copy our American colleagues, I would use the term our newest lawyers so often mistakenly use and ask if I might “approach the bench.” But as a Canadian lawyer and the President of the Canadian Bar Association, I will simply ask if we might have a voir dire?
I would like to speak with you, fairly and frankly, about the CBA and its representation of judges. As each of you knows well, the Canadian Bar Association has an unparalleled record of speaking out to defend the interests of our judiciary. We have long recognized that judges, by the nature of their office, cannot publicly advocate for their interests, and that it falls by necessity to the Bar to fulfill that role. The independence of our judiciary is a cornerstone of our democracy and of the rule of law, and we have always been ready and willing to defend that independence against encroachment.
I need only provide a few brief examples to illustrate our record in this regard.
- We respond quickly and forcefully whenever political figures, talk-radio hosts, or populist writers make personal attacks on judges who have rendered unpopular decisions.
- We have taken the lead in resisting calls to politicize the judicial appointment process in ways that would reduce the meticulous appointment process to televised theater.
- We have consistently supported every recommendation of independent commissions that judges’ salaries and benefits be set at fair levels and protected from government interference.
The CBA, in short, has always been there for Canada’s judges—we have done our fair share and more for the judiciary. And judges have often been quick to laud the CBA for our services in this regard, which we, of course, appreciate. But judges have not always been so quick to translate their appreciation and express their support for the CBA in ways that would strengthen our collective voice, primarily by means of becoming members.
Certainly, many judges do recognize the value of the CBA’s services to the judiciary, such that they gladly acquire and annually renew membership in the Association. Indeed, if you have received this e-newsletter from the CBA, you are among those who have joined the CBA and become members of the Canadian Judges Forum (CJF). I am deeply appreciative of your support, and I am continually impressed by the Forum’s activities and accomplishments within the CBA community.
The uncomfortable but unavoidable fact remains, however, that judicial membership in the CBA generally is low, and has been for quite some time. Despite the fact that no organization has done more and gone to greater lengths to defend our judiciary and advance its interests, relatively few judges have returned that support by way of a completed CBA membership application form.
It is a state of affairs that leaves me puzzled, and leaves other CBA members more than puzzled. Speaking plainly, I have had some members of the Association ask me why it is that the CBA does so much for judges when judges seem disinclined to recognize and solidify that support by joining the Association. I respond that defending judges is part of our professional duty, which is as good an answer as I can give. But I have found, especially recently, that it has not been a very satisfying answer to my questioners.
Reluctance to compromise the fact or appearance of judicial independence by joining the CBA would be an understandable possibility why a judge does not become a member. But the CBA has taken steps to ensure both the appearance and reality of independence for our judicial members. No judge may be a voting member of our governing Council, and all judicial activities within the CBA take place within the context of the Canadian Judges Forum, which has established watertight independence from the CBA’s policymaking functions.
Indeed, the greater advantages to the justice system of judicial membership in the CBA are easy to identify. Through the CBA and the CJF, lawyers and judges are uniquely able to hold conversations about our common goal of continuously upgrading the quality of our legal system and the justice that it dispenses. CBA lawyers can inform judges of trends, developments, concerns and opportunities for the improvement of our justice system of which judges might otherwise have no means of learning. Far from compromising the line between the bar and the judiciary, the Canadian Judges Forum strengthens that line by conducting these conversations in a clearly delineated public zone of propriety and independence.
Any judge who has lingering doubts about the aptness of CBA membership need look no farther than our new vision statement, issued along with a revitalized brand and logo this past spring. Chief among our defining characteristics is that the CBA is “the champion of the rule of law, across Canada and around the world.” This is not a role that any member of the judiciary could have difficulty supporting.
This concludes my voir dire, and I appreciate your consideration of these points and concerns. Nobody is more committed to protecting and promoting the interests of the judiciary than I am, and you know that the CBA has always been there for our judges. We look forward to working with all our judicial colleagues, both inside and outside the CBA— and we especially look forward to more opportunities to work with you inside our Association.
Vox Judicia readers - please feel free to forward my column to your judicial colleagues who are not CBA members. And please tell them that I would be very happy to receive their comments at cbapres@cba.org.
Honourable mentions
By Hon. Sophie Bourque
Every year, Canadian judges prove to be valuable members of their community and often receive recognition for their contributions. This year, we asked Chief Judges/Justices to help us spread the good news. Congratulations to all of them – they are an inspiration to us all.
• Justice Popescul received the Saskatchewan Legal Education Society 2008 Award of Excellence for Legal Education Development. The award was presented at the midwinter meeting of the CBA Saskatchewan Branch in Saskatoon.
• Hon. Juanita Westmoreland-Traoré received the Mérite Christine-Tourigny from the Québec Bar, in recognition of her contribution to society and women in the profession.
• On Nov. 13, 2008, the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse awarded the prestigious Prix Droits et Libertés to Hon. Juanita Westmoreland-Traoré for her unwavering commitment to combating discrimination and promoting equality on behalf of the citizens of Quebec. Madame Westmoreland-Traoré has been a judge at the Court of Quebec since 1999 and the Court is extremely proud to have her in its ranks.
• Hon. Jean-François Buffoni of the Quebec Superior Court is the jurist of Italian heritage to be honoured at the 2009 annual spring banquet held by the Association of Italian Canadian Jurists of Quebec (L'Association des juristes Italo-Canadiens du Québec - Associazone dei giuristi Italo-Canadesi del Québec).
• Hon. Louise Mailhot, formerly of the Quebec Court of Appeal, has received a doctorat honoris causa from the University of Ottawa for her distinguished service in tirelessly pushing to improve the law.
• Hon. John H. Gomery and Hon. Pierrette Rayle received the F.R. Scott Award from McGill University for their distinguished contribution to the law.
• Retired Quebec Court of Appeal judge Hon. Jean-Louis Baudouin has received the University of Montreal’s Law Faculty Medal.
• Justice Paul Belanger, former Regional Senior Justice, retired on Sept. 30, 2008, after 30 years of service on the bench in Ottawa. He was honoured by many members of the legal community and the Premier at a celebration held at the Museum of Civilization in Gatineau, QC.
• Justice Gilles Renaud from Cornwall published a book: The Sentencing Code of Canada, Principles and Objectives in 2008;
• In 2008, Justice Rommel Masse sitting in Kingston, was nominated by J.C.’s International as “Citizen of the Year.” He was granted an Honorary Diploma at the commencement exercises for St. Lawrence College, and was awarded a “Paul Harris Fellowship” by the Rotary Club in Kingston.
• In June 2008, Regional Senior Justice Judith Beaman was named a “Woman of Influence and Inspiration” by the Ontario Public Service in Kingston.
• Hon. Judge Ronald J. Meyers was honoured by the Manitoba Bar Association on Jan. 23, 2009, with the Distinguished Service Award.
• Hon. Gerard E. Mitchell, Chief Justice of Prince Edward Island and of the Supreme Court Appeal Division, retired in April 2009. Chief Justice Mitchell was appropriately fêted for his excellent service as a judge over the course of 28 years including the last eight years as Chief Justice of Prince Edward Island. During a special sitting of the superior courts held to recognize the formal separation of the Supreme Court as the court of first instance and the Court of Appeal, Chief Justice Mitchell (retired) was recognized for his exceptional and special contributions in the areas of access to justice, Charter jurisprudence, particularly regarding s.8, and his leadership as chair of the Canadian Judicial Council’s Committee on Models of Courts Administration.
• In March 2008, Associate Chief Judge Gurmail Gill and Judge Shehni Dossa were nominated by Douglas Todd of the Vancouver Sun as B.C.’s 100 Most Influential Indo-Canadians.
 TOP
“A judge is a judge is a judge...”
By Lcol Jean-Guy Perron
So wrote the Honourable Claire L’Heureux-Dubé, Q.C., in her addenda to the 2008 Report on the Military Judges Compensation Committee. Canadian military justice and its judiciary, much like Canadian criminal justice, have seen much change in the past 30 years. This article will provide you with a brief description of the military bench and of the military justice system as it exists today.
While permanent courts exist throughout Canada, one cannot refer to a Canadian military court in that sense since the concept of a permanent court does not yet exist in the Canadian military justice system. The SCC was of the opinion that section 11(f) of the Charter “does contemplate the existence of a system of military tribunals with jurisdiction over cases governed by military law.” Each court martial is convened to try one or more accused. There exist two types of courts martial: the Standing Court Martial composed of a judge and the General Court Martial composed of a judge and of a panel of five members. Although this panel is not considered a jury, it is responsible for any finding of fact as would a jury in a criminal trial. Members of the panel are chosen randomly and must be members of the Canadian Forces. A court martial has the same powers as are vested in a superior court of criminal jurisdiction with respect to matters involving witnesses, the production of documents, the enforcement of its orders and any other matters necessary for the exercise of its jurisdiction.
The Code of Service Discipline found in the National Defence Act (NDA) and the Queen’s Orders and Regulations for the Canadian Forces (QR&O) provide for almost every aspect of military justice. A court martial has jurisdiction over offences found in sections 73 to 129 of the NDA, in any statute enacted by Parliament (s. 130 NDA) as well as any infraction to a host nation’s laws (s. 132 NDA). Courts martial may be held anywhere in Canada and in the world wherever persons subject to Code of Service Discipline may be present (i.e. Afghanistan, US, Europe).
The Office of the Chief Military Judge is composed of the Chief Military Judge, Colonel Mario Dutil, and three puisne judges, Commander Peter Lamont, Lieutenant-Colonel Louis-Vincent D’Auteuil and Lieutenant-Colonel Jean-Guy Perron. The Governor in Council may appoint officers who are barristers or advocates of at least 10 years standing at the bar of a province to be military judges (s. 165.21 NDA). The selection process is identical to the federal nominations process and the selection committee makes recommendations to the Minister of National Defence. A quadrennial Compensation Committee makes recommendations on the remuneration of military judges based on the prevailing economic conditions in Canada, including the cost of living and the overall economic and current financial position of the federal government, the role of financial security of military judges in ensuring financial independence, the need to attract outstanding officers as military judges and any other objective criteria that the Committee considers relevant.
Military judges regularly attend workshops and conferences organised by the National Judicial Institute. Also, since 2008, a military judge has been a member of the executive committee of the Judges’ Forum. Hopefully, this succinct article has helped you learn about a component of the Canadian justice system that is evolving and is still relatively obscure for most people. Please feel free to ask us any question you might have concerning military justice whenever we are participating in workshops or conferences.
TOP
The Rule of law
By Bernard Amyot
Past President, Canadian Bar Association
The principle of the rule of law is very easy to explain: in a democratic society, the law must be the ultimate and unavoidable standard of conduct for all citizens, without exception, including the State. It must take precedence over political will and social conventions. Upheld by independent courts of law, it is applied to everyone equally. Without the rule of law, the door is open to abuse, and even anarchy.
|
Bernard Amyot
Past President Canadian Bar Association | |
In the fall of 2007, having declared a state of emergency and suspended the Constitution in Pakistan, then-President Musharraf dismissed the country’s Supreme Court judges just as they were about to declare his regime unconstitutional. The world watched as thousands of lawyers, dressed in black and demonstrating peacefully, were beaten and arrested. These scenes of violence against lawyers shocked the legal community and the Canadian public.
We could not sit by while the most basic principles of the rule of law were flouted. Canadian jurists had to denounce this unacceptable situation and Canada had to use its reputation as a land of justice to lead a worldwide protest.
The following day, the CBA publicly declared its support for the rule of law and its solidarity with Pakistani lawyers and judges. We wanted to do something dramatic, and we decided to march in solidarity to the steps of the Supreme Court of Canada. I added my voice, as the president of the CBA, joining with nearly 300 other lawyers on a windy Sunday morning in November 2007 (and thousands of jurists around the world) in calling for an end to the state of emergency and the reinstatement of the Constitution and judges of Pakistan.
Since then, the state of emergency has been lifted and many lawyers have been freed, but we must not be complacent. Recently, despite President Musharraf’s ouster, this question resurfaced once again. Thus, a year and a half later, further pressure had to be applied so the new government would announce its intention to reinstate Judge Chaudhry as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The CBA continues to stand on guard and act as the voice of all Canada’s jurists (lawyers, judges, notaries, law professors and students) by proclaiming, in every major forum, the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary and the legal profession.
The primacy of these values was the theme of a number of position statements I had the opportunity to make during my presidential year. Accordingly, the CBA was one of the loudest voices calling for recognition of the rights of Omar Khadr, the young Canadian held in Guantánamo by the American authorities for his alleged involvement in terrorist activities when he was just 15 years old.
I denounced the federal government’s inaction on several occasions; its willingness to allow young Khadr to remain the only citizen of a western country incarcerated in that prison which has become a symbol of injustice. Despite the gravity of the crimes he is charged with, this young Canadian citizen has been denied his fundamental right to a just and fair trial in Canada. His imprisonment under such conditions is an intolerable situation which, unfortunately has still not been corrected.
Even if Omar Khadr has nothing in common with the people I see in my practice on a daily basis, the defence of his fundamental rights is incumbent on every lawyer who is concerned about ethics and justice. The rule of law is a universal and fundamental value, which all lawyers must stand up for, in business and otherwise. This is a responsibility, a duty, which cannot be severed from the privilege of practising our profession.
TOP
Hon. Thomas A. Cromwell a fine addition to the Supreme Court of Canada
|
Honourable
Thomas A. Cromwell | |
By Hon. Justice Jill Hamilton
By now I imagine the members of the Supreme Court of Canada have realized how well suited the newest member of their court, the Honourable Thomas A. Cromwell, is for his new position.
I feel confident stating this as I know everyone on his former court, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, thinks Tom was an ideal judge of this court for the 12 years he sat on it. While we are delighted for him personally to have the opportunity and honour of serving on the highest court in the country, we miss him in many ways. I have no hesitation saying that our loss is Canada's gain.
Not only does Tom have a brilliant legal mind, he is a very hard worker and takes his responsibilities to litigants, counsel and his fellow judges very seriously.
Tom took his law degree at Queen’s in his hometown of Kingston, Ontario and then went to Oxford for his BCL. He completed it in just one year instead of the usual two. He then articled and practiced in Ontario for a few years before coming to Halifax where he started teaching at Dalhousie Law School in 1982. Except for the three years he served as executive legal officer to Supreme Court Chief Justice Antonio Lamer, Tom continued to teach at Dal as a well respected professor until 1997 when he was appointed to the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. His time serving Chief Justice Lamer no doubt gave him an insight into his present responsibilities and also gave him the opportunity to perfect his French. He also acted as a labour arbitrator on many occasions before being appointed to the bench.
Tom has a deep understanding and passion for many areas of law as is evident not only from his clearly-reasoned judgments but from the many books and articles he has produced. He has written on many topics including standing, evidence, the Charter, human rights, written advocacy and many aspects of criminal law.
Tom is a natural teacher and a great writer, crucial assets for a judge of the Supreme Court whose decisions provide ongoing guidance on many key legal issues. His clarity of thought and the power of his reasoning in dealing with complex legal matters is apparent from his judgments. This will help others understand the concepts and apply them. He has an appreciation of how law evolved and is evolving and its purpose in society, gleaned perhaps from his days at Oxford. He is keenly attuned to the crucial role of the Charter in Canada.
A love of teaching led Tom to be involved in the judicial education programs offered by the National Judicial Institute year after year. I imagine the organizers at NJI will miss having access to Tom as he delves into the heavy case load at the Supreme Court.
Tom’s work ethic is strong. He is always well prepared for the cases he is hearing which counsel who have appeared before him know. His questions of counsel are often probing, and always respectful, as he searches to uncover every nuance of the issues that must be resolved between the litigants.
Tom’s collegiality will be of continuing importance in his new position where different views of the law will of necessity be voiced and discussed among people working together closely on an almost daily basis. His ability to work with others in resolving difficult issues is one of Tom’s strong points. His quick wit often provides just the right touch during a difficult meeting.
While Tom is dedicated to the law, he is much more than that. He has a strong sense of family. He is very proud of his wife and son and was always an attentive son. He is also a lover of good food and good wine and is very knowledgeable about both. I have the impression there are not many grilled cheese sandwiches served in the Cromwell household, with Tom producing gourmet fare on a regular basis. I am sure by now Tom will have reacquainted himself with the finer grocery stores and wine shops in Ottawa.
Tom is a great addition to the Supreme Court.
TOP
The rewards of international volunteer work: a personal perspective
By Hon. Terry Shupe
For the past several years, semi-retired Judge Terry Shupe has made toys for free distribution to children in Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Croatia, Bosnia and Kamloops, B.C. He has visited Tangalle, Sri Lanka six times to participate in the construction of houses and communities, and more recently he has been working to support construction of a trades training facility in that region. Here is Judge Shupe in his own words describing his involvement in international work.
I was appointed a Provincial Court Judge in January of 1976, and became an adhoc Judge in January of 2000. That species of Judge has been replaced with the Senior Judges' Program in B.C. My assignments come from the Office of the Chief Judge, and average one week per month. These assignments cover many of the regions of B.C.
When not judging, I am primarily in my woodwork shop, building wooden toys. Those toys are now with less fortunate children on every continent. Prior to semi-retirement, and with the aid of a number of carpenter buddies (from western Canada theatre, the Kamloops-based professional theatre company where I am both on the board of Directors, and an honorary carpenter) built my 600 square foot workshop. It is fully equipped, which enables me to build many thousands of toys to date, and provides space for family, friends, and lately, soldiers to attach wheels, oil and varnish the toys.
Much of the wood is donated by local businesses, but I do have to underwrite the cost of laminated pine, hardwoods, wheels, dowels, dolls for the cradles, and all finishing materials.
Since June of 2005, I have chaired a Mayor’s Committee which provides tsunami recovery to Tangalle, Sri Lanka. Tangalle is a southern fishing community of 11,000 that lost 257 residents and 920 buildings during the tsunami. The severity of the devastation was overwhelming to me on my first volunteer trip in 2005, with Developing World Connections. Since then, I have returned to Tangalle six times to participate in the construction of houses,and communities (one at Ketakalawatta has a playground and retail shops.) Presently we are constructing a trades training facility and we also fund computer labs and offer opportunities for English language instruction. To date, all of our funding comes from volunteers and from fundraising.
Hundreds of my wooden toys have found their way to Tangalle, where I have had the pleasure of seeing the children’s faces light up upon receipt of the toys. Most recipients have no other toy. And the circle continues to widen. In January of 2009, I arrived home from my last trip to Sri Lanka to find an e-mail of digital photos of our Canadian soldiers handing out my toys while on patrol in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Since that time, I have delivered two more shipments of toys to the Armoury in Kamloops for delivery to named soldiers in Afghanistan. I received confirmation in March that the second shipment had arrived safely and will be distributed to an orphanage.
My interest in international volunteer work began long before my work in Sri Lanka. In 2002 I was a voluntary mentor to Judges in the newly created Basic Court of Brycko district, Bosnia-Hezegovina. I was there at the behest of Central and Eastern European Law Initiative (CEEL.I) That experience was both challenging and enlightening, and I believe that has changed me in some ways. The personal stories of the adversity and the horrors of war remain with me. The judges told me that they appreciated the Canadian perspective, and the absence of condescension in my mentoring. It was an honour to work with such courageous professionals.
I heartily recommend the notion and practice of international service vacations, which combine opportunities for travel with opportunities to improve the quality of life for others. Developing World Connections partner with stable NGOs in many countries, delivering a significant variety of goods and services directly to the people who most need them. The rewards far exceed the effort and expense. I’m confident that retired Judges have much to offer, and much to contribute.
TOP
Events of special interest at the 2009 Canadian Legal Conference:
Judges' Forum Reception
Sunday, Aug.16, 2009, 4 p.m.–6 p.m
Shelbourne - Adam Suite
Judges’ Forum CLE
Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights * **
Monday, Aug. 17, 9:30 a.m.–12 p.m.
Conrad Hotel - Dodder/ Liffey Room
The panel will address the human rights issues that have arisen as a result of counter-terrorism measures that result both from international and national law. Speakers will consider recent judicial decisions of international courts and treaty bodies, including the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice, as well as those of national courts.
* This program has been approved for 2.5 hours of recognized Professional Development by the Barreau du Québec
** This program has been approved for 2.5 hours of recognized Professional Development by the Law Societies of British Columbia and Northwest Territories
Moderator:
Professor William A. Schabas, OC MRIA
Director, Irish Centre for Human Rights
National University of Ireland, Galway
Panellists:
Michelle Farrell
Doctoral Researcher, Irish Centre for Human Rights
National University of Ireland, Galway
Professor Colin Harvey
Director, Human Rights Centre, Queen's University Belfast
Phil Shiner
Public Interest Lawyers (PIL)
Birmingham, United Kingdom
Judges' Forum Annual Business Meeting
Monday, Aug. 17, 2009, 12:00 p.m.–1 p.m
Shelbourne - Constitution Suite
We look forward to seeing you in August!
TOP
The Canadian Judges’ Forum is now accepting nominations for three positions on its Executive Committee for the 2009-2010 term: one Secretary-Treasurer and two Members-at-Large. The term of office for each position is one year, beginning
Sept. 1, 2009. The Secretary-Treasurer will become Vice-Chair in the 2010-2011 term and Co-Chair in the 2011-2012 term.
The National Officers have nominated Hon. Sophie Bourque for the Secretary-Treasurer position (Cour supérieure du Québec – Montréal) and Lieutenant-Colonel Jean-Guy Perron, CD (Military Judge) for Member-at-Large. Additional nominations will be accepted until Aug. 6, 2009.
The Executive Committee is responsible for the overall operation and direction of the Forum’s activities. The duties of the Secretary-Treasurer include preparing minutes of meetings and liaising with National Office staff concerning financial matters. The Members-at-Large assist the Executive in carrying out the Forum’s mandate.
The criteria for nomination include participation and interest in the Forum’s activities, gender and regional representation, and representation from different levels of court. Elections for the three positions will take place at the Judges’ Forum’s annual meeting, which takes place Monday, Aug. 17, 2009 from 12-1:00 p.m. during the Canadian Legal Conference in Dublin.
Nominations or information about nominations process should be forwarded to:
Edith S. Pérusse
Judges’ Forum Staff Liaison
500-865 Carling Avenue
Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5S8
Tel. 1-800-267-8860, ext. 179
Fax. (613) 237-0185
E-mail: edithp@cba.org
Nominations must be received in writing by Aug. 6, 2009.
TOP
1st Co-Chair
Claude C. Boulanger - Cour du Québec
300 boul Jean-Lesage, bureau R-244
Québec, QC G1K 8K6
Tel. (418) 649-3492
Fax. (418) 643-8432
ccboulanger@judex.qc.ca
2nd Co-Chair
John A. Menzies - Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba
1104 Princess Ave
Brandon, MB R7A 0P9
Tel. (204) 726-6700
Fax. (204) 726-6148
John.Menzies@gov.mb.ca
Vice-Chair
Michelle K. Fuerst - Superior Court of Justice
50 Eagle St W
Newmarket, ON L3Y 6B1
Tel. (905) 853-4810
Fax. (905) 853-4824
Michelle.Fuerst@scj-csj.ca
Secretary-Treasurer
J.G Cohen - Provincial Crt BC-Surrey
14340 57 Ave
Surrey, BC V3X 1B2
Tel. (604) 572-2300
Fax. (604) 572-2301
gcohen@provincialcourt.bc.ca
Past Chair
Elizabeth A. Hughes - Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta
601 5 St SW
Calgary, AB T2P 5P7
Tel. (403) 297-6314
Fax. (403) 297-8625
elizabeth.hughes@albertacourts.ca
Member
Sophie Bourque - Cour supérieure du Québec
Palais de Justice
1 rue Notre-Dame E, suite 12.2
Montréal, QC H2Y 1B6
Tel. (514) 393-2220
Fax. (514) 864-6402
sbourque@judex.qc.ca
Member
Peter J. Lamont - Office of the Chief Military Judge
Department of National Defence
101 Colonel By Drive
Ottawa, ON K1A 0K2
Tel. (819) 994-7960
Fax. 819-997-6321
lamont.pj@forces.gc.ca
Staff Liaison
Edith S. Pérusse - Canadian Bar Association
500-865 Carling Ave
Ottawa, ON K1S 5S8
Tel. (613) 237-2925 x179
Fax.. (613) 237-0185
edithp@cba.org
TOP
2009 CAPCJ Conference - Sept. 23 to 26 - Calgary, Alberta
Please click on this link for more information: CAPCJ National Conference.
TOP
|
