Yeah his remarks are what’s undermining public confidence in the „justice“ system… Not the fact you can kill two people and be given the opportunity to flee the country again after already having fled once
spinosaurs70 on
Politicians should in general shouldn’t comment on specific judge decisions but Judges should still care about the optics of there stupid decisions.
KingRabbit_ on
I think lawyers are under the impression that everybody involved in the legal system should just be immune from any kind of public criticism in perpetuity.
Judges should never be questioned, bail hearings are sacrosanct, we’ll put a stop to any kind of disbarment hearings and us plebs will just sit and wait to be told by the elite JD class what we should think about the way the legal system operates.
After all, we couldn’t possibly begin to grasp the grand decision making from these intellectual titans that walk amongst us.
alpinethegreat on
> Because „judicial independence is an important feature of our system of law,“ Kinew should have considered that “his comments do more to hurt the public’s confidence in the administration of justice than this decision ever could,“ the defence lawyers‘ association said in a written statement on Wednesday.
Unlike Ford, Wab didn’t even call for decreased judicial independence. He simply criticized a bad decision made by a judge. That doesn’t undermine anything at all, unless they genuinely believe that politicians, and not the judiciary themselves, are primarily responsible for the public anger against the courts?
Although it’s true that the blame isn’t entirely on individual judges, it is absolutely the fault of the judiciary. The Supreme Court’s decisions recognizing that the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty = people have an absolute right to unconditional bail in most cases, and Parliament subsequently codifying that decision, is the most direct cause of the bail crisis. It prevents judges from locking up those “outlier cases”, and brings down the reputation of the whole bail system.
The judiciary is not, and never was meant to be some untouchable monolith that can never be wrong. And it’s especially not the legislature/politicians job to run a positive PR campaign for the judiciary when they fuck up.
Cyber_Risk on
Funny how the legal establishment is always tripping over themselves to respond to these kinds of comments, but never address the core issue as articulated by Premier Kinew:
>“We need to recognize [that] the public is losing confidence in the administration of justice in our province in a general sense,”
This is true across Canada and the only response from the legal establishment is that the public is either misinformed or simply too stupid to understand the decisions of their betters.
sokos on
But it was completely fine for JT and the justice minister at the time to criticize the Boushie, and Ghomeshi
trial outcomes??
BuvantduPotatoSpirit on
You can’t undermine the public’s confidence in the justice system at this point, any more than you could prescribe medicine to Queen Elizabeth that would undermine her health. It’s simply too late for that.
There’s no doubt reporting bias, I’m sure the justice system gets it right sometimes – blind squirrels, stopped clocks, etc., but every time they wildly fuck it up, they answer the press that should be beyond criticism. When a patient dies in a hospital corridor, the response from doctors isn’t that the healthcare system should be immune to criticism, when a kid graduates high school not knowing how to read, we don’t see teachers lining up to say how graduating that kid should be free from criticism.
Like, at least „Hey, we’re overworked and need more funding“ is probably true. Most of us could empathise with that.
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
7 Kommentare
Yeah his remarks are what’s undermining public confidence in the „justice“ system… Not the fact you can kill two people and be given the opportunity to flee the country again after already having fled once
Politicians should in general shouldn’t comment on specific judge decisions but Judges should still care about the optics of there stupid decisions.
I think lawyers are under the impression that everybody involved in the legal system should just be immune from any kind of public criticism in perpetuity.
Judges should never be questioned, bail hearings are sacrosanct, we’ll put a stop to any kind of disbarment hearings and us plebs will just sit and wait to be told by the elite JD class what we should think about the way the legal system operates.
After all, we couldn’t possibly begin to grasp the grand decision making from these intellectual titans that walk amongst us.
> Because „judicial independence is an important feature of our system of law,“ Kinew should have considered that “his comments do more to hurt the public’s confidence in the administration of justice than this decision ever could,“ the defence lawyers‘ association said in a written statement on Wednesday.
Unlike Ford, Wab didn’t even call for decreased judicial independence. He simply criticized a bad decision made by a judge. That doesn’t undermine anything at all, unless they genuinely believe that politicians, and not the judiciary themselves, are primarily responsible for the public anger against the courts?
Although it’s true that the blame isn’t entirely on individual judges, it is absolutely the fault of the judiciary. The Supreme Court’s decisions recognizing that the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty = people have an absolute right to unconditional bail in most cases, and Parliament subsequently codifying that decision, is the most direct cause of the bail crisis. It prevents judges from locking up those “outlier cases”, and brings down the reputation of the whole bail system.
The judiciary is not, and never was meant to be some untouchable monolith that can never be wrong. And it’s especially not the legislature/politicians job to run a positive PR campaign for the judiciary when they fuck up.
Funny how the legal establishment is always tripping over themselves to respond to these kinds of comments, but never address the core issue as articulated by Premier Kinew:
>“We need to recognize [that] the public is losing confidence in the administration of justice in our province in a general sense,”
This is true across Canada and the only response from the legal establishment is that the public is either misinformed or simply too stupid to understand the decisions of their betters.
But it was completely fine for JT and the justice minister at the time to criticize the Boushie, and Ghomeshi
trial outcomes??
You can’t undermine the public’s confidence in the justice system at this point, any more than you could prescribe medicine to Queen Elizabeth that would undermine her health. It’s simply too late for that.
There’s no doubt reporting bias, I’m sure the justice system gets it right sometimes – blind squirrels, stopped clocks, etc., but every time they wildly fuck it up, they answer the press that should be beyond criticism. When a patient dies in a hospital corridor, the response from doctors isn’t that the healthcare system should be immune to criticism, when a kid graduates high school not knowing how to read, we don’t see teachers lining up to say how graduating that kid should be free from criticism.
Like, at least „Hey, we’re overworked and need more funding“ is probably true. Most of us could empathise with that.