Federal Court Justice Robin Camp wants to plead his case in person to the Canadian Judicial Council before it decides whether to remove him from the bench for his mishandling of a 2014 sexual assault trial in Alberta.

Camp, who was a provincial court judge at the time, admitted to several mistakes during that trial, including asking the alleged rape victim, "Why couldn't you just keep your knees together?"

Following an inquiry last summer, a panel of five Superior Court judges and senior lawyers unanimously recommended Camp lose his job.

But before deciding whether to accept that recommendation, Camp's lawyers say the judicial council should allow him a chance to make direct, oral submissions.

"Natural justice demands that the judge have a meaningful, personal opportunity to make his case before the body that decides his fate," the lawyers wrote in a 25-page submission to the council released on Friday.

The "career-ending potential" of the case raises the stakes of the council's decision, Camp's lawyers argue, given the "publicity and stigma" the inquiry generated.

"The content and notoriety of the allegations will make it difficult for Justice Camp to resume legal practice if [the judicial] council recommends removal," they wrote.

"He deserves a robust process, commensurate with this reality."

'Ignorance, not animus'

The committee of inquiry concluded that "Justice Camp made comments or asked questions evidencing an antipathy towards laws designed to protect vulnerable witnesses, promote equality and bring integrity to sexual assault trials."

"We also find that the judge relied on discredited myths and stereotypes about women and victim blaming during the trial and in his reasons for judgment," the committee wrote in its 116-page report.

But Camp's lawyers contend the judge, who was educated in South Africa, was genuinely unaware of modern Canadian law surrounding sexual assault and his admitted misconduct in the case "was the product of ignorance, not animus."

Furthermore, the lawyers argue Camp made "reasonable legal decisions" and, once he recognized his other errors, made "sincere and effective" efforts to correct them.

"He apologized and rehabilitated himself," they wrote. "In the circumstances, the ultimate sanction of removal is counterproductive."

Camp's lawyers also wrote that "poorly-informed or short-term public outrage" should not influence the council's decision.

Next steps

Once they've reviewed the written submission and decided whether to allow for an oral submission, the council — comprised of roughly two dozen chief justices from across the country — will review the matter and make a recommendation to the federal justice minister.

Only two judges have been recommended for removal by the Canadian Judicial Council since the review body was created in 1971.

In both those cases, the judges resigned before the recommendations made it to Parliament, which ultimately decides whether or not to dismiss a Canadian judge.