From the bench to the hot seat, Toews can’t seem to fly straight

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 24/04/2017 (3326 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Vic Toews is in trouble. Again.

Last week, we learned the Court of Queen’s Bench judge, and former federal and provincial politician, had contravened the federal Conflict of Interest Act.

Federal Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson reported last week Toews had twice broken conflict of interest laws in 2013 when he provided lobbying and consulting services to two Manitoba First Nations within a few months of his retirement from politics. The federal law is designed to ensure retired cabinet ministers cannot use the sensitive information they absorbed while in government to enrich themselves or outside entities that have dealings with Ottawa.

The process that culminated in these findings is very cautious and conservative. In other words, the federal ethics commissioner does not have a tradition of jumping to unfounded conclusions, or engaging in alarmist commentary. However that did not stop Toews from lashing out at Dawson with visceral indignation.

As has been the case in the past, Toews used Winnipeg lawyer Robert Tapper to protest the allegations. As is his style, Tapper threw everything including the kitchen sink at Dawson, in essence accusing her of incompetence and working outside her jurisdiction.

Tapper’s assertions were almost entirely designed to be noise to distract attention from the fact that a sitting federally appointed judge was found guilty of having violated a federal law in the brief six months between his departure from politics and his appointment to the bench. The findings are serious enough that Democracy Watch, a respected watchdog organization, has said it will file a complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council.

The CJC process is not an easy fit for a situation like this. However, there is still some traction for a complaint.

The CJC’s first area of concern is the performance of that judge in court. Every decision, every word they say, every facial expression and physical gesture is open to scrutiny and review by the council. But the CJC is also the guardian of the ethical and moral viability of judges. In that regard, the council may very well have an issue with Judge Toews.

It is very hard to believe Toews would have made it through the judicial vetting process had Dawson’s findings been available before he was appointed. Given that his actions took place before that appointment, there should be some concern Toews did not make a full, honest and accurate disclosure of his activities in the period after leaving politics and before accepting his position in the Court of Queen’s Bench.

Toews’ argument, enunciated by Tapper, is that at the time of his appointment to the bench, none of the allegations that resulted in Dawson’s findings had arisen. Tapper is effectively arguing that Toews should not be subjected to any review or sanctions now because he had not been found guilty of conflict of interest before he was appointed.

That’s an extraordinary argument to make and reveals pretty clearly that Toews is quite desperate to avoid any kind of CJC review. This is largely due to the fact when you add them all together, Toews has assembled a rather impressive list of moral, ethical and legal transgressions.

In 1999, Toews pleaded guilty to exceeding election spending limits while still a provincial politician. Toews blamed the over-spending on decisions by the central Tory campaign to move money in and out of his riding campaign account without his permission. Nonetheless, the conviction stands against him personally.

In 2010, it was learned that he had failed to notify the federal ethics commissioner he was receiving pension income earned during his time as a provincial crown prosecutor. This was a basic requirement of every MP and only remedied after the transgression was reported by the news media.

In 2012, while contesting a messy divorce, we learned Toews had fathered a child with a political staffer to former Tory MP Joy Smith. Despite wide-ranging publicity about his infidelity, Toews dragged out the divorce battle for years, even representing himself at one point. His woeful judgement in this matter resulted in the revelation that he had been chronically unfaithful to his first wife.

In 2015, he suffered the humiliation of having his judge’s salary garnished after a judge ruled he owed $17,000 in rent on a Quebec condominium he used while still a member of the federal Conservative government. The unilingual Toews claimed the non-payment was due to the fact the court order was written in French and he did not understand what it said. The judge in that case scoffed at his excuse, noting that as a former federal cabinet minister — and a man that speaks both Spanish and Low German in addition to English — he should have had more success interpreting a court order in Canada’s other official language.

Some of these issues would have been known to the federal panel that vetted Toews for a appointment. Given its decision, we can assume that what was known at that time was not enough to disqualify Toews.

However, Toews’ body of unethical and illegal behavior has expanded significantly since he was first considered for the Court of Queen’s Bench. It’s hardly a stretch to suggest now that Toews’ suitability to serve as a judge may have been viewed a bit differently had the most recent incidents been known in 2014.

Toews and his lawyer would prefer the judicial council and the public not take stock of his what appears to be a long history of unethical and sometimes illegal activity. But when you add it together, it’s difficult to see how this man deserves to be sitting in judgement of others.

dan.lett@freepress.mb.ca