Article content continued

Judge Girouard’s court action argues that Canadian Judicial Council procedures, which could result in his removal from the bench, threaten “judicial independence enshrined in the Constitution.”

It questions the legality of the council’s procedures because they were not properly registered with the Privy Council. And it says the review panels that decide whether a public inquiry should be held do not operate under any established rules of evidence.

On Thursday, the Attorney General of Canada argued that Judge Girouard’s motion should be dismissed because it is premature. Claude Joyal, representing the Attorney General, said the judge’s complaints are best raised with the inquiry committee, as has happened in previous cases.

Parliament assigned the judicial council the role of overseeing the integrity of the judiciary, and the Attorney General maintains it would be counter to legislators’ wishes for the court to intervene at this stage

The challenge comes at a time when the judicial council is under scrutiny following its handling of a complaint against Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Lori Douglas. An inquiry into Judge Douglas’s conduct, stemming from nude photos of her posted to the Internet by her husband, led to accusations of bias on the part of the committee overseeing the inquiry. The committee and the independent counsel leading the inquiry stepped down, and Judge Douglas is asking the Federal Court of Appeal to halt the inquiry.

In March, the judicial council announced a review of its procedures and sought public input on what it needs to do to “keep pace with the public’s evolving expectations of fairness, efficiency and transparency in the process.” The results of the review have not yet been published.

National Post

• Email: ghamilton@nationalpost.com | Twitter: grayhamilton