Law Office of Munyonzwe Hamalengwa


Home Services Experience Articles Publications  Work in Progress The Media Link Sites Contact


JUSTICE INTERRUPTUS, Thursday, January 20, 2005

This year 2004 has been a very bad year for judges and justice. Except for the increase in salaries, Judges  have had the worst year in living memory.
So has justice. It indeed has been a year we should label, "Justice Interruptus"-Justice interrupted.
One Judge in Guelph decides that he does not like allegedly drunken drivers and he voices his disapproval in open court. He convicts. Counsel defending the next allegedly drunken driver in a case before that judge decides to bring a motion for recusal of that judge. The judge refuses but the summary conviction judge (Superior Court of Justice) tosses him out. In the earlier case in which that judge had convicted, the lawyer appeals that conviction.
The judge starts to send e-mails to the crown to see whether the recusal decision should be appealed and that the judge will help in framing the appeal. That judge won't be hearing drinking and driving cases for some time. He may also not be convicting  lightly for some time.
But what was this judge thinking in sending e-mails to the crown attorneys.
How many judges send e-mails to crown attorneys that we do not know about?
It was learnt that that judge was a former crown attorney. Mama Mia!
Drunk drivers are not liked by judges. One judge this year was reversed at least twice by the summary conviction appeal courts because it was found out that he wrote what is called "boiler- plate" decisions even when the evidence could not fit the structure. A boiler-plate decision is a pre-fabricated decision, that is amenable to ignoring the real facts of the case but is geared towards a pre-conceived decision. The boiler-plate judge was convicting the recipients of his pre-fabricated decisions. No doubt. But what was this judge thinking about? That he would not be caught by a clever lawyer. The boiler-plate judge is different from the recusal-refusing judge.
But some judges like the bottle. A Judge of a higher court in Quebec pled guilty to drinking and driving. She resigned her post. Now that is tragedy.
But that is the state of justice in 2004. Then there is the judge in St.Catherines who started borrowing money from some crown attorneys who were appearing before him. It is like a professor borrowing money from a student. What grade  do you think that student will get? How broke was this judge? Why didn't he borrow money from the bank?
The Bank President desirous of striking a friendship with an influential member of society would have gladly opened the vaults to the judge. Now the tax payers have to foot the bill to assist all those individuals who were convicted by this judge when the judge's creditors were prosecuting.
The Attorney General for Ontario is prosecuting another judge who had railed against the crown attorneys in a murder case. This judge had gone the furthest in condemning prosecutorial misconduct and prosecutorial violations of constitutional rights in the history of Canada. He had acquitted the accused of murder because of prosecutorial misconduct.

The Attorney General rarely brings an application for the removal of a judge for alleged conduct unbecoming a judge. This does not bode well for justice in Ontario. Our judges are already timid. We do not need any further intimidation.
But worst of all for justice, a judge in Barrie was found to have behaved inappropriately towards seven women by a three-member panel of judges.
Such a finding has never happened in Canadian history.
The Canadian public also learnt something shocking about drunkenness at the Supreme Court of Canada by a former Chief Justice of that court for the first time ever. A historian revealed in a Biography of a Supreme Court of
Canada Judge that the Chief Justice of Canada in the mid-sixties was a hopeless drunk which affected his duties at the highest court in the land. And the public never got to know it, until now. And there has not been any outcry of any kind or any discussion as how to avoid or prevent such behaviour in the future. That Chief Justice was sitting during the Steven Truscott appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. How many cases of "justice interruptus" are out there?
 


Member Of:

Criminal Lawyers Association                                                   The Law Society Of Upper Canada

                                     Law Society of Upper Canada

                                              

                                                                            Last Modified: August 20, 2007

Home Services Experience Articles Publications
 
Work in Progress The Media Link Sites Contact

Copyright @ 2005 by C&H