Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada is Canada's highest court and is located in the capital city of Ottawa. It is now the final court of appeal, the last judicial resort for all litigants, whether individual or governmental. Its jurisdiction embraces both the civil law of the province of Quebec and the common law of the other provinces and territories. When handling Quebec civil law cases the court is careful to have them reviewed by the three civil law judges that are always on the court.

Appointments

Under Canadian law the Governor General appoints all justices of the court on recommendation from the Cabinet. In practice, it is the Prime Minister of Canada who holds the most authority in determining who is appointed, though he is expected to consult with the Minister of Justice, and others, before making a decicison.

Related Topics:
Governor General - Prime Minister of Canada

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Supreme Court Act limits eligibility for appointment to persons who have been judges of a superior court, or members of the bar for ten or more years. Members of the bar or superior judiciary of Quebec, by law, must hold three of the nine positions on the Supreme Court of Canada. This is justified on the basis that Quebec uses Civil Law, rather than Common Law, as in the rest of the country. By convention, the remaining six positions are divided in the following manner: three from Ontario, two from the Western Provinces and one from the Atlantic Provinces.

Related Topics:
Supreme Court Act - Bar - Civil Law - Common Law

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The term for a Supreme Court justice is until he or she retires or, at latest, attains the age of 75 years.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Criticisms of the appointment process

The appointment process has been the source of some controversy in recent years, as appointments rarely occur with much prior scrutiny by parliament or opposition political parties. Critics have alleged that this process has allowed the Prime Minister to effectly "stack" the court with ideologically like-minded individuals who will support his government and legislation. Conservative critics have argued this leads to the rise of partisan, activist judges instead of neutral ones. Supporters have justified the process of appointment on the grounds that "quiet" appointments made as a result of the Prime Minister's consultation with experts result in better choices than ones that would be made if opposition politicians were allowed to openly interrogate and veto his choices.

Related Topics:
Parliament - Activist judge

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In response to the critics, Prime Minister Paul Martin changed the appointment process slightly in 2004. Now, before an appointment is made a special parliamentary committee is formed to screen the new nominees and report to Parliament on their findings, though neither this committee nor the parliament has the power to block appointments. Similarly, the committe does not have the ability to directly interview the nominee. In 2004 when this process was practiced for the first time, committee members from the Conservative Party of Canada refused to sign their committee's final report, calling the entire process "insufficient".

Related Topics:
Paul Martin - Conservative Party of Canada

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~