One of the little ways we like to say we’re Canadian, not American, is to point out that at least our legal system is based on solid judicial principles..We would never do anything as naff as electing judges or prosecutors, for example. What follies, never mind partisan disgraces, might fall from that?.Well, what indeed? Find a nut who thinks criminals are hard done by and wants to get rid of cash bail, get George Soros to finance his election as District Attorney and watch arrest-and-release turn once flourishing neighbourhoods into places where shops close and people get killed..No, we certainly wouldn’t do that..What we Canadians would do however, and this in the interests of diversity, is to appoint a judiciary that is overwhelmingly Liberal. Liberal that is, as in followers of the Liberal Party, not liberal-generous or liberal-open minded. And the Liberals are famously soft on crime..Diverse identities yes. We would do that and the federal forms upon which one applies for a judicial appointment assures the applicant that, “The Government will seek to support the achievement of gender balance and a reflection of the diversity of the members of Canadian society on the Superior and Federal courts.”.It then gives them an opportunity to state whether they are “Indigenous, a Visible Minority, Ethnic/Cultural Group or Other, Disabilities, LGBTQ2 or a Woman.”.There seems something a little demeaning about lumping ‘Woman’ in there along with racial and sexual distinctions but presumably the more boxes a person ticks, the better their chances. If one is black, trans, disabled and also a ‘Woman,’ one might as well mention it, I suppose..But diversity in ways of thinking?.Are you an originalist? Do you think law should reflect principle or public opinion? Should one standard for justice prevail for all Canadians, or should some races and groups be treated differently to others?.The form does not encourage discussion of things like that..This is because it does not need to..We have a parallel process to ensure right-thinking on those matters, in which candidates for judicial appointment are compared to donor lists to political parties to see who might be intellectually in sympathetic lockstep with Canada’s Natural Governing party..The process is not 100%..Sometimes applicants who gave money to the NDP or the Conservative Party of Canada are appointed. Possibly these are individuals of outstanding merit, or maybe they’re just there to validate the system: “See, we don’t just appoint Liberal donors.”.But, it’s pretty obvious that being a member of the Laurier Club — the Liberal association for those who max out their legal party donations — is a solid indicator of suitability to adjudicate laws passed by Canada’s Liberal government..More recently, the Post and the IJF cautiously took note that men with ‘similar’ names to recent bench appointments “may have paid to meet with the prime minister or the deputy prime minister at Liberal Party fundraisers shortly before being appointed.”.A little meeting, just to be sure, to be sure?.Be that as it may, since the Liberals took power in October 2015 says the IJF, more than three times as many Liberal donors had received judicial appointments, as Conservative donors..And with what results?.Sure enough, a light-on-crime system of law and order in which people who should have remained in custody are released for spurious reasons — too many indigenous men in prison, for example— and then commit further egregious offences..Newly-appointed Justice MInister Arif Virani says that "empirically" Canadians are no less safe and it's nothing to worry about; meanwhile municipal police forces warn people to be careful on public transit..So really, Canadian courts are as liberal as those in the US, but it's our own government that steers them that way..If you have Justin Trudeau, you apparently don't need Soros. In any case, if you're ever defending yourself in court, the odds are your case will be heard by a Liberal. .We probably shouldn't be bragging.
One of the little ways we like to say we’re Canadian, not American, is to point out that at least our legal system is based on solid judicial principles..We would never do anything as naff as electing judges or prosecutors, for example. What follies, never mind partisan disgraces, might fall from that?.Well, what indeed? Find a nut who thinks criminals are hard done by and wants to get rid of cash bail, get George Soros to finance his election as District Attorney and watch arrest-and-release turn once flourishing neighbourhoods into places where shops close and people get killed..No, we certainly wouldn’t do that..What we Canadians would do however, and this in the interests of diversity, is to appoint a judiciary that is overwhelmingly Liberal. Liberal that is, as in followers of the Liberal Party, not liberal-generous or liberal-open minded. And the Liberals are famously soft on crime..Diverse identities yes. We would do that and the federal forms upon which one applies for a judicial appointment assures the applicant that, “The Government will seek to support the achievement of gender balance and a reflection of the diversity of the members of Canadian society on the Superior and Federal courts.”.It then gives them an opportunity to state whether they are “Indigenous, a Visible Minority, Ethnic/Cultural Group or Other, Disabilities, LGBTQ2 or a Woman.”.There seems something a little demeaning about lumping ‘Woman’ in there along with racial and sexual distinctions but presumably the more boxes a person ticks, the better their chances. If one is black, trans, disabled and also a ‘Woman,’ one might as well mention it, I suppose..But diversity in ways of thinking?.Are you an originalist? Do you think law should reflect principle or public opinion? Should one standard for justice prevail for all Canadians, or should some races and groups be treated differently to others?.The form does not encourage discussion of things like that..This is because it does not need to..We have a parallel process to ensure right-thinking on those matters, in which candidates for judicial appointment are compared to donor lists to political parties to see who might be intellectually in sympathetic lockstep with Canada’s Natural Governing party..The process is not 100%..Sometimes applicants who gave money to the NDP or the Conservative Party of Canada are appointed. Possibly these are individuals of outstanding merit, or maybe they’re just there to validate the system: “See, we don’t just appoint Liberal donors.”.But, it’s pretty obvious that being a member of the Laurier Club — the Liberal association for those who max out their legal party donations — is a solid indicator of suitability to adjudicate laws passed by Canada’s Liberal government..More recently, the Post and the IJF cautiously took note that men with ‘similar’ names to recent bench appointments “may have paid to meet with the prime minister or the deputy prime minister at Liberal Party fundraisers shortly before being appointed.”.A little meeting, just to be sure, to be sure?.Be that as it may, since the Liberals took power in October 2015 says the IJF, more than three times as many Liberal donors had received judicial appointments, as Conservative donors..And with what results?.Sure enough, a light-on-crime system of law and order in which people who should have remained in custody are released for spurious reasons — too many indigenous men in prison, for example— and then commit further egregious offences..Newly-appointed Justice MInister Arif Virani says that "empirically" Canadians are no less safe and it's nothing to worry about; meanwhile municipal police forces warn people to be careful on public transit..So really, Canadian courts are as liberal as those in the US, but it's our own government that steers them that way..If you have Justin Trudeau, you apparently don't need Soros. In any case, if you're ever defending yourself in court, the odds are your case will be heard by a Liberal. .We probably shouldn't be bragging.
