OTTAWA—An outraged Canadian legal community is marshalling criticism of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, writing an open letter to him and seeking outside international help to reaffirm the independence of Canada’s top jurist.

More than 650 lawyers and law teachers from across Canada released an open letter Tuesday calling on Harper to withdraw his criticism of Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin.

· Justice Minister MacKay escalates criticism of Chief Justice

In apparent expectation that the government will not back down, a second letter from seven top Canadian legal academics asks the International Commission of Jurists in Geneva to investigate what they call the Conservative government’s “unfounded criticisms levelled at the Chief Justice.”

· Harper should not impugn integrity of Chief Justice: Editorial

“We fear that the unprecedented statements of the prime minister and minister of justice and attorney general, which question the integrity and judgment of the chief justice of Canada, may seriously undermine judicial independence in Canada,” says the letter to Geneva.

· Harper lashes out at Chief Justice

Harper and Justice Minister Peter MacKay — following a string of legislative and policy defeats at the Supreme Court — suggested nearly two weeks ago that McLachlin acted inappropriately by calling to flag a potential legal issue in the elevation of a Federal Court judge to a Quebec seat on the top court.

Harper and MacKay intimated that McLachlin’s call amounted to lobbying on a case before the court, forcing McLachlin’s office to publicly clarify that she called during a consultation period last July, two months before Federal Court of Appeal Judge Marc Nadon was named.

Harper and MacKay have refused to back down in the face of a storm of criticism that erupted ever since. They have also not moved to appoint a new judicial candidate for the Quebec vacancy on the court.

Tuesday’s letters are the latest salvo in a battle that saw public calls last week by 11 former presidents of the Canadian Bar Association and by the Council of Canadian Law Deans for Harper to withdraw his suggestion.

The first open letter lists 35 pages of signatures by members of the Canadian legal profession and legal academy and says: “We . . . deplore the unprecedented and baseless insinuation by the Prime Minister of Canada that the Chief Justice engaged in improper conduct.”

It continues: “Public criticism of the chief justice impugns the integrity of Canada’s entire judiciary and undermines the independence of Canada’s courts.

“An independent judiciary is vital to the health of any democracy and a foundational tenet of Canada’s constitutional order and the rule of law. Impugning the integrity of the judiciary, including through public and personal criticism of the chief justice, represents an attempt to subvert that judicial independence.”

The second letter says the actions of the Conservative government that “question the integrity and judgment of the chief justice of Canada, may seriously undermine judicial independence in Canada.”

And it says the discussion between McLachlin and MacKay “involved a possible new appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada, a topic well within guidelines for appropriate conversations between prime ministers and chief justices.”

In reply to the letters Tuesday, the prime minister’s spokesman, Jason MacDonald, responded by email to the Star that: “The prime minister’s position on the issue is well known and there is nothing to add to your story.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

MacKay’s spokesperson, Paloma Aguilar, echoed that same statement, referring to “comments both the prime minister and minister MacKay have made on this issue in question period. These comments stand and I have nothing further to add.”

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau accused Harper Tuesday of “picking fights with the chief justice and his disrespect of the procedures in place has left us with an incomplete court to deal with some very serious issues.”

But he suggested the search to fill the vacancy need not start anew. “I am hoping that of the names that were already vetted, they will find someone that they can name in short order because that’s the most urgent element.”

Read more about: