LILLEY: Chief Justice Wagner refuses recusal in Freedom Convoy case
· Toronto Sun
Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, is the epitome of Laurentian Elite arrogance.
Despite having already called the people behind the Freedom Convoy names, despite having said they held Ottawa hostage, despite having disparaged them in more ways that one, Wagner will not recuse himself from an upcoming case.
Visit saltysenoritaaz.org for more information.
And it turns out that Wagner was himself judge and jury in making the decision that he has no reason to step aside as the court considers a challenge to the Emergencies Act being invoked.
The news, as first reported by National Post , is that the registrar of the Supreme Court, Chantal Carbonneau, sent a response to a complainant who had asked that Wagner recuse himself. Kristen Nagle with Canadian Frontline Nurses (CFN), one of the groups challenging the invocation of the Emergencies Act, made the request in March.
Wagner doesn’t think there’s a problem
This week, Carboneau gave Wagner’s reply, and he believes he has no reason to recuse himself.
“I am writing to advise that Chief Justice Wagner has considered the certificates and letter, and has concluded that there is no actual or reasonable apprehension of bias that would require his recusal under the applicable legal test,” Carbonneau said in her response..
“In this respect, Chief Justice Wagner has advised that he did not, at any time, either directly or indirectly, comment on the Emergencies Act.”
That’s a nice little way around this whole awkward situation; Wagner says he didn’t comment on the act. Perhaps true, but he had plenty to say about the people the act was invoked against and their actions in Ottawa, which is why he should be recusing himself from this case.
Denunciation of Convoy beyond what a judge should say
Here’s what our fine chief justice told Le Devoir in French in April 2022.
“What we saw recently on Wellington Street here is a small beginning of anarchy where certain people decided to take other citizens hostage, to take the law into their own hands, not to respect the mechanism … I find that worrying,” he said.
He called the protestors ignorant, said some were remote controlled and that what they did “must be denounced forcefully, and this by all figures of power in the country.”
Are you starting to see why Wagner shouldn’t be anywhere near this case?
Anything short of him upholding the two rulings of the lower courts that the invocation of the Emergencies Act was unconstitutional will have people questioning his judgment. Did he decide based on the facts or based on his personal feelings?
There are rules for judges and they apply to Wagner
“Judges must be and should appear to be impartial with respect to their decisions and decision making,” reads Ethical Principles for Judges published by the Canadian Judicial Council.
“The appearance of impartiality is to be assessed from the perspective of a reasonable, fair minded and informed person.”
The guidebook also says judges should refrain from “public discussion which, in the mind of a reasonable, fair minded and informed person, would undermine confidence in a judge’s impartiality with respect to issues that could come before the courts.”
I’d argue that a reasonable, fair minded and informed person would look at Wagner’s past comments and advise him to sit this one out. That he won’t seems to be in keeping with his outsized ego and his past actions.
This is a judge who had a bust of himself displayed in the lobby of the court while refusing to say who paid for it or how much it cost. Wagner thinks so much of himself that he believes the public should hear his political positions, an area a chief justice should be quiet on.
Wagner’s decision not to recuse himself has the potential to bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Before any decisions are made, Wagner should step aside for this case.