Complaint 3

Some complaints are very serious in nature, but are not supported with any evidence or demonstration of fact. These types of complaints can be difficult for Council to review. An example of such a complaint was submitted to Council this year which included serious allegations of bias and conflict of interest on the part of a judge.

In a divorce case, the complainant said that several judges, lawyers, police and other officials, demonstrated bias in favour of her ex-husband. She said her husband was involved in known criminal activity and had influence over all these individuals.

The complainant said that one judge was "politically motivated" and that he manipulated the facts as part of a "criminal conspiracy" that involved her ex-husband's associates.

Although the allegations are very serious, Council found that they were based entirely on suppositions and vague theories of conspiracy. Since there was not a single piece of evidence to support the allegations of a "criminal conspiracy" involving many judges and public officials, that part of the complaint was rejected.

This same complaint included an allegation that one judge, several years prior to appointment, was a lawyer in the same firm that now represented her ex-husband in business dealings. On this point, Council noted that any allegation of a conflict of interest must be raised before the court. In the absence of any bad faith, this is not judicial misconduct. The complaint was therefore rejected. // NEXT