OK Scooter Libby’s Presidential Pardon for obstruction of justice and perjury before a Grand Jury is perceived by President Bush’s equivalent of judicial jaywalking. Is that really our concern in Canada? It is American politics after all. However given Mr. Stephen Harper's proclivity to mimic all things Bush-league, I worry.
What if Harper actually manipulated the judicial appointment process, as he has professed to want to do? Would a Prime Ministerial pardon ever be even necessary (if it were possible in the first place in Canada) given that the Harper hand picked court of the future may be far from free and independent.
True Mr. Libby’s transgressions are not as tacky as a blowjob in the Oval Office anteroom with a willing Intern. They are however, to put the kindest possible light on it, power politics trumping a duty for good governance by the U.S. Executive Branch - and at so many levels.
In fact the Libby outing of a CIA operative (spy) while serving as Chief of Staff for the Vice-President, done for pure domestic partisan political reasons, undoubtedly put the lives and families of many more CIA operatives around the world at risk. Then to lie about it and to obstruct justice to boot – especialy given the fact that he is a lawyer and clearly knows better…that is unfathomable and unforgivable...unless of course you are George Bush and a Presidential pardon is within your power.
To “died in the wool” American Republican Conservatives Dubya must seem like a rock today. He is, after all, showing the "courage" to grant a Presiential Pardon to a reckless, wanton felon who may yet be seen by history to be a de facto traitor. To socially progressive citizens everywhere, given his actions yesterday, President Bush is also going to be perceived to be like a rock – only dumber.
I think Dubya just gave up the White House and the Congress to the Democrats in the 2008 elections with this action. I wonder if he hasn't also invited the laggardly impeachment proceedings against him to now pick up steam. That may be an appropriate reaction for American citizens to pursue, save for the fact that if impeachment were successful then Dick Cheney would be his pro tem replacement. Another rock - but this time it is one who like to be in or be creating "a hard place."
I want to look up to America but this latest abuse of the Rule of Law by the American head of state is making that nearly impossible, at least for now. Come on America...make us proud of you and your principles once again. We Canadians all know the world needs more Canada. But it also needs a renewed America.
The Liberals has been notorious for appointing judges who have made hefty donations to the LPC - that seems to be quite a manipulation of the judicial system (i.e. handpicking those lawyers who have deep connections within the party).
ReplyDeleteThe Libby incident kind of reminds us of a certain scandal in Canada where the person got a job as an ambassador rather than being subject to criminal prosecution. Cool figure. I disagree with what Bush did today in the same manner that I disagreed with the LPC for not holding a true criminal trial for all those involved in the sponsorship scandal (rather than a mere commission of inquiry).
Boy does this set of shallow observations miss the gravity of the Bush pardon yesterday.
ReplyDeleteSince when did a political donation become a crime? I know of a recent Federal Liberal Justice Minister who appointed very competent judges with Alberta provincial PC and NDP allegiances. So what! It is the political manipulation of the appointmetn committee selection process that is Harper’s sin.
Again we see a Harper Con supporter saying we are bad but not as bad as the other guys you threw out so be grateful for having us in power. Not good enough. Not nearly good enough
I think in fairness to the first "anonymous" post, Ken, you did try and tangentially connect a U.S. presidential pardon with Harper in a negative way. Your comments are usually better than that, but I think your distaste for all things Bush-ian and Harper-ian sometimes clouds your otherwise good judgement.
ReplyDeletePresidential pardons are almost always controversial. Because if you didn't do something "bad" you wouldn't need a pardon. Look a Clinton's pardon of Mark Rich... which coincidentally came after a large donation was made by Rich's wife for a Clinton-named library. There was even a Law&Order TV episode loosely modelled on that one.
You seriously believe that the appointments process was not being manipulated under the liberals rule WHEN THE SOLE DECISION OF WHETHER TO APPOINT A JUDGE OR NOT WAS AT THE PREROGATIVE OF THE PRIME MINISTER? Please name ONE judge appointed by the CPC who is not competent - if you cannot, you're simply making accusations without any proof (i.e. a shallow observation).
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on your last point. The LPC has set the bar very low (i.e. corruption at its worst and utter inaction on the environment). The CPC must do better - the long term interests of Canada are at stake.
Anonymous - you have to stick to the facts and restrain yourself from extending what few facts you rely on into hyperbole.
ReplyDeleteOf course one can't name a Harper appointed judge that is not competent - in part because he has appointed very few in the 18 months he has been PM.
Besides it would be too early to tell as to and individual's competency until a judge gets a track record on the Bench.
My point was nothing to do with this in any event. My concern is by restricting and rigging the membership of the previously independent judicial review committee Harper can be more assured of getting "recommendations" that have political and personal perspectives that fit and maybe then serve his political agenda.
That is the problem. It is not legal competency or the amount of political donations that is at issue here. It is about the appointees’ values and their independence from the Prime Minister's influence that I worry about.
We saw the deference paid to the PMO in Adscam by senior administrators including DMs. Why would one expect anything different from a judicial appointee who was not truly independent?
The courts protect citizens from the state...and believe me we need such protections.
Ask Maher Arar about the importance of an independent judiciary. Wonder for a moment how important you would value that independence if you found yourself in his shoes one day.
Let me get this straight. You believe that in the former process it was impossible for the LPC to get individuals they wanted on the bench nominated? To get your facts straight, there are hundreds of names put forward for nominations (all of whom are very qualified to do the job). The PM then chooses from the large list a few individuals - one would hope that liberal lawyers could make it to the initial list!
ReplyDeleteIt is funny how you were unable to point to one juidical appointee that the CPC has appointed who was not qualified for the job. Your argument that "time will tell" if they are qualified does not hold water: once a judge is appointed, they cannot be fired. Thus, the critical point in time is at the appointment stage where one examines the qualifications. I ask again: point to one judge who you view may have had inadequate qualifications. The CPC has appointed many judges in the past 2 months - surely you can point to one.
"It is about the appointees’ values and their independence from the Prime Minister's influence that I worry about."
Two responses:
(1) This statement makes me question your legal education. Surely you realize that a PM cannot influence a judge once they are appointed. This principle was recognized by the SCC and is now enshrined in our Constitution as an unwritten principle. As well, this principle is much broader than the mere inability to fire a judge once appionted. Once either the LPC or the CPC appoints a judge, they have no obligation to tow the party line whatsoever.
(2) With regard to the appointees' values, read my comments above re: appointing liberal supporters.
Well said Ken.
ReplyDeleteThe concern I have is that if a President or his staff choose to ignore the rule of law (like Libby) what is the check and balance on abuse of power? The presidential pardon allows the president's people to be above the law.
I think the only check and balance is exercised by the electorate at the next election. While Bush will not suffer defeat his party might. That's not very satisfying from a voters point of view in holding an elected official accountable..
Anon @ 10:05
ReplyDeleteMy understanding of the judicial appointment recommendation process is that individual lawyers submit applications and they are not "names put forward" at that stage.
The applicants are subject to a thorough committee review including extensive reference checks. I have been a reference for a few applicants and know just how extensive the reference checks are.
I know the provincial process better but I expect the federal process parallels it in many ways. There applicants are reviewed put into categories, essentially, exceptional, adequate or not appropriate...my category names - not what they used I expect.
As vacancies came up or additional appointments are needed, the committee determines a list of three recommendations were submitted to the Minister based on the needs of the Court...be it youth, criminal, civil vacancies etc. The policy is that the Minister could then only choose from amongst those recommendations.
As I said, I am not as familiar with the federal process but presume it is similar. My fear is Harper is trying to control the appointment recommendations by controlling the review committee membership.
BTW judges do get disciplined and even fired by a group called the Judicial Council - namely other judges. There is a request for a Judicial Council review of a judge in Alberta right now.
It is not about inadequate qualifications for appointment - such people get weeded out early in the process. It is is about personal capacity, wisdom, independence - if an applicant was "inadequately qualified" they would never get past the initial screening process.
Ken, as usual, insightful - for another take on this, read the last few days and probably next few days of Doonsbury - again Gary Trudeau nails the beltway politics.
ReplyDeleteIt is indeed a sad day for democracy - but is the US really a democracy???
TPH