A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Conservatives fuming over Omar Khadr lawyer Federal Court appointment.

So this happenned:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau‘s Liberal government has appointed one of Omar Khadr‘s former lawyers as a justice in federal court. The appointment of Toronto-based lawyer John Norris was announced by Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould Monday. Norris is also an adjunct professor at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law and has worked with several legal advocacy organizations over the years.

Not surprisingly, that enraged Conservatives like MP Candice Bergen. You can almost see the smoke coming out of her ears.

A lot of Conservatives  still seem aggrieved over Stephen Harper’s long losing streak in court cases in the Federal and Supreme Court, but Omar Khadr and anyone who defended him (or defends him) earns extra venom and more enmity then usual from them.

A couple of nice responses from those on social media responding to the likes of Candice Bergen and other Conservatives:

..”promoting a lawyer who worked pro-bono for someone who had their Rights trampled by successive governments and wins means that he isn’t qualified to be a judge? I want a judge to understand what our Charter Rights are.”


 …it isn’t as though Trudeau and Wilson-Raybould pulled this appointment out of nowhere. Federally appointed judges are recommended through Federal Judicial Advisory Committees, which are rigorous bodies containing representatives from the bar, the bench, and the public at large. Secondly, there are over 1100 federally appointed judges in office. They are an overwhelmingly capable group, but …some degree of controversy can come with the territory for a litigator who is effective at their job.

I also would respond to a Conservative in this thread who claimed that this decision would undermine confidence in our “already troubled judiciary”

My response to that is: Perhaps Conservatives are troubled by the fact they can’t break the Constitution and law with impunity, but the more rational of us folks would call a lawyer or Judge who made sure that rule of law and Charter Law was followed was not only being prudent and important.. but would make sure the Judiciary was “working as (constitutionally) intended, and there was nothing “troubling” about it.

I would ask Conservatives this, as another person on social media also did:

Other than representing Khadr, is there actually a legitimate reason Conservatives can point to that would make him unqualified for the bench?



Comments are closed.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.