The Canadian Judicial Council (CJC; ) is the national council of the judiciary of Canada, overseeing the country's federal judges.
The Council has 44 members, composed of chief justices and associate chief justices. It is chaired by the Chief Justice of Canada, currently Justice Richard Wagner.
History
The council was created in 1971 by the Parliament of Canada following years of discussion about the need to coordinate professional development and judicial conduct matters for judges, in a way that would respect the judiciary as an independent branch of government. The review of complaints had previously usually been coordinated by the Department of Justice, with the occasional involvement of local Chief Justices.
Landreville case
A key factor that facilitated the creation of the council was the case of justice Leo Landreville. He was charged with a criminal offence. Those charges were dismissed, but allegations of impropriety continued to be made by some. This gave rise to quite a bit of public debate; some in the legal profession criticized the fact that the judge was still sitting. A Committee of the Law Society, despite not having jurisdiction over a federally appointed judge, produced a negative report without even notifying Landreville of its proceedings.
There being no defined process to formally inquire into the conduct of a judge, the government then constituted a one-man Royal Commission headed by former Supreme Court Justice Ivan Rand. In his report, Rand found some improprieties and was critical of Justice Landreville. However, some said Mr Rand was biased and famous constitutional lawyer J.J. Robinette who represented Justice Landreville before the Commission was seriously critical of the process.
After the Rand report became public, a joint Committee of Parliament eventually recommended the judge's removal and he resigned.
There were many who came to a view that the process which had been followed was flawed: the absence of a process defined in legislation to review the conduct of a judge left too much room for review by the law societies, government or Parliament, of even other bodies without necessarily involving the judiciary.
Professor William Kaplan, in his book Bad Judgment, wrote that "[w]ithout a doubt, the Landreville case figured prominently in the decision to establish the council." He quotes the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice who spoke during second reading of the Bill that created the Council: "Because the independence of the judiciary is an integral part of the Canadian democratic process, it is important that the judiciary become, to some extent, a self-disciplinary body."
According to Martin Friedland, "There is no doubt that the awkwardness and uncertainty of the Landreville proceeding was a factor motivating Parliament to adopt this new procedure."
Organization and activities
The CJC's activities have been characterized as seeking to investigate complaints about judicial misbehaviour and on the other hand protecting the reputation of judges against unfounded accusations.
{| class="wikitable"
|+CJC members,
{| class="wikitable"
!
!Name
!Inquiry year
!Committee recommendation
!Outcome
|-
|1.
|Gordon Hart
|1990
|Remain
|
|-
|2.
|Malachi Jones
|1990
|Remain
|
|-
|3.
|Angus MacDonald
|1990
|Remain
|
|-
|4.
|Fernand L. Gratton
|1994
|None
|Resigned before committee made recommendation
|-
|5.
|Jean Bienvenue
|1996
|Removal
|Resigned
|-
|6.
|Robert Flahiff
|1999
|Removal
|Resigned
|-
|7.
|Bernard Flynn
|2003
|Remain
|
|-
|8.
|Jean-Guy Boilard
|2003
|Remain
|
|-
|9.
|Theodore Matlow
|2007
|Removal
|Remained after full panel of CJC recommended he not be removed
|-
|11.
|Michel Déziel
|2015
|Remain
|
|-
|12
|Michel Girouard
|2016
|Removal
|Full panel of CJC recommended he not be removed
|Resigned, after the Minister of Justice sought to remove Justice Camp from the bench
|-
|14.
|Michel Girouard
|2017
|Removal
|A re-hearing of the first inquiry conducted in 2016. The full council voted 23–3 in favour of recommending to the Minister of Justice to remove Justice Girouard from office on February 20, 2018. Resigned after appeals failed.
|-
|15.
|Frank Newbould
|2017
|None (proceedings stayed)
|Justice Newbould retired from office before the proceedings of the Inquiry Committee began.
|}
Criticisms
Limited removals
In its 40-year history, the CJC has only ordered 11 public inquiries and only twice recommended that a judge be removed from the bench. In the 145 years since Confederation, only five superior court judges have been recommended for removal from the bench.
The CJC has said that misconduct should not guarantee the judge's removal, and the gravity of the misconduct must be determined. expressed concern that the CJC is too secretive. Wooley criticized the CJC for not clearly articulating what constituted misconduct worthy of sanctions.