|
|- ! bgcolor="6699FF" | Case opinions |- | |} The ''Provincial Judges Reference''〔the three formal titles of the decision are ''Manitoba Provincial Judges Assn. v. Manitoba (Minister of Justice)'' from the Manitoba appeal, ''R. v. Campbell; R. v. Ekmecic; R. v. Wickman'' from the Alberta appeal, and ''Reference re Remuneration of Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince Edward Island; Reference re Independence and Impartiality of Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince Edward Island'' from the PEI appeal. It is also known as the ''Provincial Judges Reference''- see F.L. Morton and Ranier Knopff, ''The Charter Revolution & the Court Party'', (Toronto: Broadview Press, 2000), page 108, or the Supreme Court's decision in ''Reference re Secession of Quebec'', para. 50, and ''Re Remuneration of Judges''- see Peter W. Hogg, ''Constitutional Law of Canada'', 2003 Student Ed., (Scarborough, Ontario: Thomson Canada Limited, 2003), page 187.〕 () 3 S.C.R. 3 is a leading opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada in response to a reference question regarding remuneration and the independence and impartiality of provincial court judges. Notably, the majority opinion found all judges are independent, not just superior court judges and inferior court judges concerned with criminal law, as the written constitution stipulates. Unwritten constitutional principles were relied upon to demonstrate this, indicating such principles were growing in importance in constitutional interpretation. The reference also remains one of the most definitive statements on the extent to which all judges in Canada are protected by the Constitution. The majority opinion established that independent compensation commissions are required to help set salaries free of political manipulation. These commissions, described by the majority as "an institutional sieve"〔Lamer C.J., para. 170.〕 and by the dissent as "a virtual fourth branch of government," make recommendations that governments may deviate from only with rational explanations. However, the reference has been subject to harsh published criticisms. ==Background== The reference was the amalgamation of three different sets of challenges to the impartiality and independence of provincial court judges in Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, and Alberta. The powers of the provincial legislatures to reduce the salaries of the provincial court judges was challenged as a violation of section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which gives an accused the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty "in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal". In Prince Edward Island and Manitoba, the salaries of judges were lowered along with those of other civil servants to help combat deficits. In Prince Edward Island, various challenges of the judges' consequent independence were raised by defendants, causing the government to bring two reference questions to its Supreme Court. Only one reference resulted in a finding of dependence, namely for lack of adequate security of tenure. In Manitoba, the pay cut was challenged directly by a provincial judges association. Meanwhile, in Alberta, cuts to judicial salaries were challenged by defendants. Concerns in Alberta were also raised by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein saying on the radio that a certain judge should be "very, very quickly fired." The judge had threatened to simply stop working due to his belief that his salary was insufficient.〔Lamer, para. 19.〕 (The Supreme Court only briefly addressed this, saying Klein's words were "unfortunate and reflect a misunderstanding of the theory and practice of judicial independence in Canada."〔Lamer, para. 286.〕) 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Provincial Judges Reference」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|