RSS FeedBilingualism and the Supreme Court
As reported by the Globe and Mail, a bill requiring that all future Supreme Court justices be bilingual was passed last week and now awaits Senate approval. The private member’s Bill C-232, tabled by NDP language critic Yves Godin, was harshly criticized by former Supreme Court puisne judge John Major on CBC’s “The Current” radio show.
Major argued that the only way to uphold the Rule of Law in Canada is to have the most competent people in the Supreme Court, not to put the emphasis on linguistics. Since there is far more bilingualism in the East, requiring bilingual Justices from the West would lower the grade of the talent pool. Major noted that both Parliament and the UN use translators. He said that in his 13 years on the Court there was never a single case where he didn’t fully understand the case, between translators and extensive case preparation. Major argued that “fluently bilingual” is a very high threshold to achieve, and most justices only learn French after they are appointed. Interestingly, Major criticized several times former justice minister Irwin Cotler and former lawyer Bob Rae for their support of the bill.
While Godin argued that Harper broke a fully bilingual Court by appointing Rothstein (who is currently taking language lessons), Major countered that it’s actually only two or three current Justices who are truly bilingual. Godin’s primary concern was that someone arguing a case before the Court would not be fully understood, a concern that Major effortlessly debunked.
Phil Fontaine, former National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, called the bill is “elitist” because it does not fully reflect the diversity of Canada. I would call it elitist because it is only a small subset of Canada’s English-speaking population that has access to quality French-language instruction at a young age.
Iacobucci: Recognizing History of Residential Schools a “Necessary Step”
Notes from a keynote speech by Justice Iacobucci at the Federation of Asian Canadian Lawyers (FACL) Fall Conference.
Grew up in the East End of Vancouver, where there was lots of diversity of people from many backgrounds. Justice Iacobucci noted that he entered the law exactly 50 years ago, in 1959, when he graduated from UBC. There wasn’t a lot of visible minorities in the profession back then. There also wasn’t a lot of “funny names” in it back then. He recalls that when he told by one of his undergraduate professors that he wanted to do law that he shouldn’t go, “You don’t have the right name for it.” But another told him that he should, because “Canada is changing.”
Canada is changing, and the proof is the numbers of visible minorities that are entering law, a profession that historically has not been welcoming to women or minorities. But there is more to do with inclusiveness, and creating strength in diversity.
He started by reminding us all that everyone in Canada can be put into two groups – native Americans, and the rest of us are immigrants. It’s just a question of timing. We’re all immigrants. Many come with values, and not much else going for them. But those values, with an opportunity, can accomplish a lot.
Not all of us have had those opportunities. The focus of Justice Iacobucci’s talk was on the Aboriginal Residential School file, one of the most challenging files he was exposed to. The talk was not about the legal aspects, but rather how a country deals with its past in a way that is fair and honourable.
