A Symposium on the Appointment, Discipline and Removal of Judges

Authors

  • ᠎ Canadian Bar Association

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29173/alr2390

Abstract

Members of panel at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Bar Association, 1971, suggest and analyze possible methods of improving the present process of selection and appointment as well as the disciplining and removal of judges. The Chairman, Mr. D. C. McDonald, outlines proposal for system of judicial appointments as suggested by Professor E. A. Tollefson in recent article. From Professor Tollefson's proposal Mr. McDonald extracts several "possibilities" including an intensive training course for judges upon their appointment, periodic refresher courses for all judges and the extension and upgrading of the "research staffs" available to the courts. The Chairman goes on to compare and contrast the disciplinary provisions that are applicable to Supreme, District and Provincial Court judges. Panel member G. M. Stirling, Q.C., who has served on the National Committee on the Judiciary of the Cana dian Bar Association, describes its function and method of operation and concludes that it is only first step in the process towards an improved method of selecting the most competent and highly qualified judges. Mr. Stirling suggests that modified form of the "Missouri plan" could be followed in Canada. The plan would involve the setting up in every province of standing independent commission "which would screen all qualified and available lawyers in the province and submit limited number of names to the Minister of Justice" from which the Minister would make his selection. Panel member, W. H. Hurlburt, Q.C., also endorses an "appropriate adapta tion" of the Missouri plan and goes on to suggest how the nominating commission might be constituted. With regard to the removal and disciplining of judges, Mr. Hurlburt approves of the concept of Judicial Council as set up by an amendment to the Judges Act (S.C. 1970-71-72 c. 55) but suggests that if the Council is to operate efficiently it must have an office and admin istrative staff. Panel member F. C. Muldoon, Q.C., submits that al

Downloads

Published

1973-02-01

Issue

Vol 11, No 2

Section

Articles

License

For Editions following and including Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License

For Editions prior to Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.

Author(s) retain original copyright in the substantive content of the titled work, subject to the following rights that are granted indefinitely:

  1. Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to produce, publish, disseminate, and distribute the titled work in electronic format to online database services, including, but not limited to: LexisNexis, QuickLaw, HeinOnline, and EBSCO;
  2. Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to post the titled work on the Alberta Law Review website and/or related websites.
  3. Author(s) agree that the titled work may be used for educational or instructional purposes and/or in educational or instructional materials. The author(s) acknowledge that the titled work is subject to other such "fair dealing" provisions and applicable legislation.
  4. Author(s) grant a limited license to those accessing the titled work from an electronic database or an Alberta Law Review website to download the titled work onto their computer and to print a copy for their own personal, non-commercial use, subject to proper attribution.

To use the journal's content elsewhere, permission must be obtained from the author(s) and the Alberta Law Review.