Chief Justice says Toews’ duties may be ‘re-examined’ in response to editorial

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 26/04/2017 (3324 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The Chief Justice of the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench has opened the door to the possibility Justice Vic Toews’ duties may be “re-examined” if a probe into his conduct advances significantly.

In a statement Wednesday triggered by a Free Press editorial, Glenn Joyal said he will be carefully following the deliberations of the Canadian Judicial Council, which is investigating Toews’ past conduct.

On Monday, the CJC said it is looking into a complaint against Toews arising from a damning report from the federal conflict of interest and ethics commissioner that stated the former federal cabinet minister violated the Conflict of Interest Act when he provided consulting services to two Manitoba First Nations shortly after leaving federal office.

That same day, Joyal announced Toews would remain as a sitting judge while the judicial council process unfolded.

When the Free Press raised concerns in its editorial that Joyal was in a “precarious situation” on the matter — because he was appointed to the provincial court in 1998 when Toews was provincial justice minister and later became a federal judge when Toews was Manitoba’s senior federal cabinet minister — the chief justice responded.

“The editorial unfairly impugns my integrity and is not worthy of further comment in respect of the alleged conflict of interest,” he said. “That said, there should be no doubt that any ultimate determinations as to Justice Toews’ judicial future will be made by Chief Justices who are members of the Canadian Judicial Council from outside of Manitoba.”

The editorial said Joyal’s response to Toews’ predicament is at odds with his action in the case of former Queen’s Bench Justice Lori Douglas, who was the subject of a CJC investigation in 2010 after nude photos of her were published online. She was asked to step down from her role as a sitting judge by Joyal’s predecessor. Joyal further reduced her duties pending the outcome of the judicial council’s proceedings.

On Wednesday, Joyal said: “If clarification is needed, it should be understood that if the complaint before the Canadian Judicial Council proceeds to further stages in the CJC disciplinary process as occurred in the Douglas case, Justice Toews’ duties, pending a final determination by the CJC, will be re-examined. This is precisely what happened in the course of the Douglas case.”

Joyal said it would be “premature” to prevent Toews from hearing cases “at this early stage of the CJC complaint.” He noted the “jurisdiction, the fairness of the ethics commissioner’s processes and her conclusions will be challenged.”

Toews’ lawyer, Robert Tapper, has lamented there is nothing the judge can do about ethics commissioner Mary Dawson’s report. “There is no appeal process because there is no legal process. (Toews is) no longer a Parliamentarian. He can’t raise it in the house,” Tapper told the Free Press Saturday.

Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, said all judges must avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

“Given that when Mr. Toews was a provincial cabinet minister he appointed Chief Justice Joyal as a provincial court judge and when he was a federal cabinet minister Mr. Toews could also have easily had some say behind closed doors in the appointment of Chief Justice Joyal to the Court of Queen’s Bench, and given that the position of judge is a secure position that lasts until retirement unless you commit serious wrongdoing, in my opinion Chief Justice Joyal has an appearance of a conflict of interest (and) should not be making decisions concerning Judge Toews in this situation.”

larry.kusch@freepress.mb.ca