百家争鸣
郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[Judicial Independence and Canadian Judges]
郭国汀律师专栏
·郭国汀评论第五十七集:东欧共产党政权的罪孽
·郭国汀评论第五十八集:人民為敵的蘇聯共產黨暴政的罪孽(一)
·郭国汀评论第六十二集:与人民为敌的苏联共产党暴政的罪孽
·郭国汀评论第六十三集:与人民为敌的苏联共产党暴政的罪孽
·郭国汀评论第六十四集:与人民为敌的苏联共产党暴政的罪孽
·郭国汀评论第六十五集:与人民为敌的苏联共产党暴政的滔天大罪
***(20)《陈泱潮文集选读》陈泱潮著/郭国汀编校
·大器晚成——《陈泱潮文集选读》序
·《造化故事》陈泱潮文选第一集
·铁幕惊雷《特权论》陈泱潮文选第二集
·《偃武修文重新建国纲领》陈泱潮文选第三集
·《时政评论》陈泱潮文选第四集
·《天命前定》陈泱潮文选第五集
·《上帝之道》陈泱潮文选第六集
***(21)《国际互联网自由》郭国汀译
·互联网自由至关重要:中国屈居全球互联网最不自由国家亚军
·互联网自由度的测定方法
·自由之家2008年中国互联网自由检测报告:不自由
·互联网自由日益增长的各种威胁
·国际互联网自由调查团队
·国际互联网自由评价词汇表
·国际互联网自由评价表格和图示
·国际互联网自由评价目录
·古巴互联网自由评价
·伊朗互联网自由评价
·突尼斯互联网自由评价
·俄国互联网自由评价
·马来西亚互联网自由评价
·土耳其互联网自由评定
·肯尼亚互联网自由评价
·埃及互联网自由评价
·印度互联网自由评价
·乔治亚互联网自由评价
·南非互联网自由评价
·巴西互联网自由评价
·英国互联网自由评定
·全球最自由的爱莎尼亚互联网自由评价
***(22)《仗剑走天涯》郭国汀著
·我的真实心声
·面对十八层地狱,我的真情告白 /南郭 网友评论
·《仗剑微言—我的四十自述>
·相信生命—郭国汀律师印象
·赵国君 做一名人权律师——访郭国汀律师
·申请任专兼职教授与评审一级律师的故事
·志当存高远-我的理想与追求/南郭
·我的知识结构与思想/南郭
·汝凭什么任教授?!/郭国汀
·我们决不再沉默! 郭国汀
·郭国汀:正义者永不孤单
·虽千万人,吾往矣!
·法律人的历史使命---郭国汀答《北大法律人》主编采访录
·法律人的历史使命 网友评论
·如何成为一名伟大的,优秀的法律人?
·如何成为一名伟大的律师?网友评论
·为当代中国人的幸福而努力奋斗
·我的告别书—再见中国律师网
·勇敢地参政议政吧 中国律师!
***(23)《郭国汀自传》郭国汀著
·《郭国汀自传》第一章:阴错际差(1)
·《郭国汀自传》第二章:灭顶之灾
·《郭国汀自传》第三章:奋力拚搏
·《郭国汀自传》第四章:东山再起
·《郭国汀自传》第五章:山重水复
·《郭国汀自传》第六章:永恒的中国心
·郭国汀致海内外全体中国网民的公开函
·极好之网站-天易综合网
·天易论坛宣言—天道至大,易道天成
·南郭不与匿名者论战的声明
·请广西网友立即转告陈西上诉
·就朱镕基与法轮功答疑似五毛党徒古镜质疑
·马克思最大的缺陷之一是其根本不了解人的本性
·南郭谈论习近平
·南郭谈论习近平秘信
·马克思恩格斯列宁之无产阶级专政辩析
·轮流强暴马恩之恶果——“无产阶级专政”
·郭律师就民运英友张林之女安妮被非法剥夺入学权事致习近平/李克强公开函
·郭国汀:批驳体制内文人俞可平严重误导国人的谬论
·父权政治公民政治及专制政治
·什么是我们为之奋斗牺牲的正义和自由?
·什么是自由主义?新自由主义?改革自由主义?
·《匪首毛泽东》20.野心恶性膨胀的邪恶致极的毛泽东
·中共政权的性质与现状
·Politics and truth
·Justice and pursuit of truth
·God and modern politics
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
Judicial Independence and Canadian Judges

   Judicial Independence and Canadian Judges

   

   By thomasgguo

   

   Judicial independence is the precondition of justice and rule of law. None judges belong to any political party. Judges are security of tenure, and since 1867, none judge were remove from the bench for bribe, although there are some problem exist.

   

   

   In Canada the Federal Cabinet appoint Supreme Court and federal court, as well as provincial appeal and superior courts Judges, while provincial Cabinet appoint provincial courts judges. There are about 1000 judges in each category. All must be qualified lawyers who at least practiced ten years for higher level courts,five years for provincial courts.

   

   

   Judges are security of tenure, the higher courts’ mandatory retirement age of 75, the lower one are 65 or 70. Any judges serve on good behaviour, cannot remove unless by guilty of misbehaviour.

   

   

   Judges cannot be removed merely because the government regards their decisions as error or contrary to government policy, nor ruled against the Crown. Besides security of tenure, judicial independence involving financial, administrative, and political independence; salaries and pensions are fixed cannot intimidated by government threat to reduce. Judges at all levels never cease asking for increases in pay.

   

   

   Judges must be able to function without political pressure. However, Judges increasingly feel their independence is threatened by certain interest group, political correctness, media criticism, political criticism, and even demonstrations.

   

   

   Individual judges have occasionally made outrageous sexist, racist, or other inappropriate comments from the bench. Judges are rarely promoted from provincial court to federal court, 70 percent of appeal court judges have previous judicial experience.

   

   

   Judges are denied vote in federal election and none judges belong to any political party.

   

   

   The Canadian Judicial Council, consist of all the chief-justice and associate chief-justices of courts staffed by federally appointed judges, chaired by the chief-justice of the Supreme Court. The purpose of the Council is deal with the complaints raise against judges. For example, Thomas Berger of the BC Superior court publicly criticized the 1982 Constitution Act for its omission of Quebec and virtually neglect of Aboriginals, his action was investigated by the Canadian Judicial Council, which did not punished him, he resigned protest the process employed.[1]The Supreme Court judges are giving more public speech and interviews than previously, sometime got them into hot water. “It is clearly preferable for judges to exercise restraint when speaking publicly” Judicial Council warmed.

   

   

   In 1982Supreme Court had its first female judge, and in 2004 there were four female judges in the Supreme Court; the first female chief justice is Bererley McLachlan, now one-quarter of all judges in Canada are women.

   

   The Cabinet have used judicial appointment to reward faithful party supporters; although the legal expertise has been taken into account, but it was rarely the primary criterion.[2] Political patronage raises three problems: unsuitable one for his partisan be appointed;well-qualified candidate are overlooked for lack service to governing party;partisan judge may favour his political colleague.

   

   

   Judges are removable for serious criminal acts and for reasons of infirmity or incapacity,failure to execute their duty, or bring the judicial system into disrepute. Only four judges at intermediate and district level met their fate of remove charged since 1867. In 2001 the Supreme Court upheld the removal of Judge Richard Therrien from the court of Quebec on the ground thatwhen he was appointed a judge, he failed to disclose to the authority that he had been sentenced imprisonment for one year for unlawfully giving assistance to the FLQ.[3]Not a single Superior court judges has been removed from office; however, such proceedings were initiated in several cases,but judges either died or resigned during the removal process. Jean Bienvenue of the Quebec Superior court resigned in 1997, after the Canadian Judicial Council asked the federal Parliament to remove him, for having said on the bench that women can be crueller than men, and that even Nazi exterminated Jews painlessly.[4]In 1999, Robert Flahiff of the Quebec Superior Court lost his position when he was sentenced three years in jail after being found guilty of laundering $ 1.7million in drug money when he was a practicing lawyer.[5]Justice Matlow and Justice Cosgrove of Ontario Superior court, formal council vote not removal, later council recommended removal, he resigned.

   

   

   

   

   [1] Rand Dyck, Canadian Politics Critical Approaches, sixthe ed. Nelsoneducation 2010 P.678.

   

   [2] Rand Dyck, Canadian Politics Critical Approaches, sixthe ed. Nelsoneducation 2010 P.672.

   

   [3] Rand Dyck, Canadian Politics Critical Approaches, sixthe ed. Nelsoneducation 2010 p.677.

   

   [4]see, Gall, The Canadian Legal System,P.231, 238-39; Russel, The Judiciary in Canada; p.176-79; the courts p. 94-103.

   

   [5] Rand Dyck, Canadian Politics Critical Approaches, sixthe ed. Nelsoneducation 2010 P.677.

(2012/01/16 发表)

blog comments powered by Disqus

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场