Brian Giesbrecht: The Politicization of the Judiciary

Competition between conservatives and progressives in Israel has sparked a heated debate surrounding the judicial reform plans of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. Currently, the top court has the power to invalidate any law it deems “unreasonable,” a term that can vary greatly between progressive judges and conservative legislators. Netanyahu argues that this judicial autocracy prevents conservatives from effectively governing, regardless of whether they form the government. This conflict mirrors a similar situation in Canada, where the National Post’s “Donating Judges” series reveals a politicized court system that does not adequately represent conservative voices. Since the Trudeau Liberals came to power in 2015, the majority of lawyers appointed to federal courts have donated to the Liberal Party of Canada, while Conservative appointees have drastically declined. This ideological shift is alarming and compromises the balance between progressive and conservative perspectives that traditionally characterized Canada’s judiciary since 1867. Furthermore, the pandemic highlighted the polarized nature of Canadian courts, with a strong bias towards progressive viewpoints and a lack of protection for civil liberties. In contrast, the United States experienced a mixed range of judicial opinions, with conservative justices focusing on civil liberties and progressive justices prioritizing public health. This disparity became apparent when Supreme Court Chief Justice Richard Wagner expressed his negative views towards convoy protesters, seemingly dismissing concerns of government overreach. However, his comments resonated more with the progressive half of the country, while the conservative half saw them as deeply insulting. Such incidents perpetuate the growing divide between progressive and conservative perspectives, challenging the long-standing diversity of opinions that shaped Canada’s success. Unfortunately, the issue of political donations, as uncovered by the National Post, indicates a troubling trend towards the politicization of Canada’s judiciary. The introduction of bilingual requirements further complicates the appointment process, making it even more challenging for Western conservatives to secure positions in the top court. It is crucial to recognize the importance of maintaining a healthy mix of progressive and conservative voices within the judiciary to ensure a fair representation of diverse opinions and maintain respect for the courts. However, since 2015, this balance has been disrupted and needs to be addressed by future governments. Failure to take measures to rectify this issue may further divide the country and undermine the rule of law. While investigations into the donation issue may occur, true resolution requires proactive efforts to restore the equilibrium necessary for the proper functioning of Canada’s judicial system.



Source link