JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS

So you might think that Judges are the cream of the crop so to speak. The best and the brightest lawyers who rise to the top of their profession. Well huh maybe. I've been going through my files again and so I'm going to reproduce the following short newspaper article in its' entirety. You the reader be the judge.

Kitchener-Waterloo Record May 4, 2007:

"Study finds political contributions linked to judicial appointments

Guelph

A University of Guelph study of judicial appointments appears to confirm what many critics have long argued-politics does have an influence.
A study of 978 judicial appointments between 1988 and 2003 found at least 30 per cent of judges appointed during the Brian Mulroney and Jean Chretien years made donations to the political party in power.
Political scientist Troy Riddell says that's quite high considering less than one per cent of Canadians donate to federal political parties.
Riddell says while people with political ties may make fine judges, it raises concerns that weaker candidates are receiving plum positions because of patronage.
Riddell says the federal government tried to change the process in response to accusations of partisan influence in 1988 by setting up screening committees to objectively evaluate the applications and make recommendations to the justice minister.
But it's a process he says "obviously hasn't happened to a satisfactory degree."

Canadian Press "


O.K. so I've got a couple of thoughts and questions. Firstly it's too bad this study (or another) hasn't simply looked at how many former lawyers who were appointed judges were members of the governing political party: with or without party donations. Secondly this study occurred after "reform" had been introduced in 1988. I wonder what the percentage was of appointed judges before 1988, who made political party donations.