Canada’s premiers need to stop attacking the courts |
Other than being the premiers of their respective provinces, David Eby, Danielle Smith, Doug Ford, and Francois Legault don’t have much in common. But when it comes to the apparent benefits of attacking the courts, they’re all on the same political page right now.
Smith’s latest broadside against the judiciary comes as no surprise. She has long positioned herself as an enemy of institutional expertise, whether that’s doctors recommending vaccines or scientists explaining the risks of climate change, and has used the Notwithstanding Clause four times to prevent the courts from being heard on issues ranging from labour rights to transgender identity. Her government even tried to pre-empt a judicial ruling on the constitutionality of a pro-separatist petition, all in an increasingly obvious effort to get that question on the ballot.
To his immense credit, the judge in question was one move ahead of the government. He released his ruling before Smith’s superseding legislation could be proclaimed into law, and while it won’t prevent the Smith government from continuing to lower the bar for separatists in the province, it did allow him to be heard. "Legislating to pre-emptively end this court proceeding disrespects the administration of justice," Court of King’s Bench justice Colin Feasby said in his ruling. "The public is entitled to the fruits of this process that has been conducted largely at their expense so that if they are asked to vote on Alberta independence, they have a tool [the courts] that may help them make sense of the legal dimensions of the secession of Alberta from Canada."
Smith, of course, fired back, depicting the courts as some sort of unelected and unaccountable antagonist sent to do Ottawa’s bidding. “The people have told us through our consultation,........