Update in the case of an Inquiry regarding Mr Justice P.T. Matlow

    OTTAWA, Nov. 27 /CNW Telbec/ - The Inquiry Committee into the conduct of
Justice Theodore Matlow, of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, has
completed a pre-hearing conference in Toronto on 19 November 2007. A
transcript of the proceedings is available on the Council's website at
    The Inquiry Committee will conduct a full hearing into this matter
beginning 8 January 2008, at 9 a.m., at 180 Queen Street West (courtroom 7C),
Toronto, Ontario. The hearing will be open to the public.
    After the inquiry has concluded, the Committee will report its findings
and its conclusions to the Canadian Judicial Council in respect of whether or
not a recommendation should be made for the removal of Justice Matlow from
office. The Council will then decide whether to make a recommendation to the
Minister of Justice that Justice Matlow be removed from office for any of the
reasons set out in section 65(2) of the Judges Act. In accordance with
Canada's Constitution, a judge may only be removed from office through a joint
resolution of Parliament. The Council's mandate, under the Judges Act, is to
make a recommendation in that regard.
    The Canadian Judicial Council is composed of the chief justices and
associate chief justices of Canada's superior courts. Information about the
Council is available at www.cjc.gc.ca.

    Background Information

    The Inquiry Committee consists of three judicial members, appointed by
the Council, and two senior lawyers, appointed by the Minister of Justice. The
members of the Committee are:

    -   The Honourable Clyde K. Wells, Chief Justice of Newfoundland and
        Labrador (Chairperson);
    -   The Honourable François Rolland, Chief Justice, Superior Court of
    -   The Honourable Ronald Veale, Senior Judge, Supreme Court of the Yukon
    -   Maria Lynn Freeland, Senior Crown Prosecutor, of Meadow Lake,
        Saskatchewan; and
    -   Douglas M. Hummell, Barrister and Solicitor, of St. Catharines,

    Independent counsel, Douglas Hunt of the law firm Hunt Partners LLP, has
been appointed to present the case to the Inquiry Committee. The mandate of
Independent Counsel is to act in the public interest and to bring all relevant
facts and points of law before the Committee for its consideration. Justice
Matlow is represented by Paul Cavalluzzo of the firm Cavalluzzo, Hayes,
Shilton, McIntyre & Cornish LLP.

    Complaints and Inquiries process:

    When someone believes that a judge's personal conduct (on or off the
bench) is in question, a complaint may be made to the Canadian Judicial
Council. The Council examines only issues of conduct and does not review a
judge's decision in law.
    The complaints process is simple: the complaint must be in writing, and
it must concern the conduct of a federally appointed judge. No special forms
are necessary. No legal counsel is required. No fees are charged. To the
extent possible, the Council reviews anonymous complaints in the same way as
complaints that are signed.
    When a complaint is made, the question before the Council is ultimately
whether or not a judge's conduct prevents that judge from discharging his
duties as a judge. In such a case, the Council must decide whether or not to
recommend that a judge be removed from office.
    A complaint is first reviewed by a member of the Judicial Conduct
Committee. A complaint can be dismissed when it is clearly frivolous or does
not fall within the mandate of the Council. In roughly half of cases, the
complaint is studied in more detail and the judge in question, as well as
judge's chief justice, are sent a copy of the complaint and asked for their
comments. The complaint is often resolved at this stage, with an appropriate
letter of explanation to the complainant.
    If the complaint cannot be resolved at that stage, the file can be
referred to a Panel of up to five judges for further review. When a Panel
concludes that the complaint has merit but is not serious enough to move to
the next stage (a formal hearing by an Inquiry Committee) then the Panel may
close the file with an expression of concern, or may recommend counselling or
other remedial measures.
    When the complaint may be serious enough to warrant the judge's removal,
the Panel can recommend that the Council establish an Inquiry Committee. After
completing its investigation, an Inquiry Committee reports its findings to the
Canadian Judicial Council. The Council then decides whether or not to
recommend to the Minister of Justice of Canada that the judge be removed from
office. In accordance with the provision of Canada's Constitution, a judge may
be removed from office only after a joint resolution by Parliament.

For further information:

For further information: Norman Sabourin, Executive Director and Senior
General Counsel, (613) 288-1566, ext. 301

Organization Profile

Canadian Judicial Council

More on this organization

Custom Packages

Browse our custom packages or build your own to meet your unique communications needs.

Start today.

CNW Membership

Fill out a CNW membership form or contact us at 1 (877) 269-7890

Learn about CNW services

Request more information about CNW products and services or call us at 1 (877) 269-7890