Open this photo in gallery:
Beverley McLachlin attended a press conference in Ottawa on December 15, 2017.Chris Watty/Reuters
Beverley McLachlin has spent the past six years defending the reputation of the Hong Kong Supreme Court while simultaneously destroying the reputation of the Supreme Court that she spent a lifetime building in Canada.
If she had decided to invest in a nice condo in Boca Raton and start doing watercolor portraits or something when she retired from the Supreme Court of Canada in 2017, her legacy would have been one of the most respected for generations. , would be recorded as one of the greatest jurists. . She was the first woman and the longest-serving Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. She was a professor and author, and a sometimes polarizing figure, but her fidelity to law and order, democracy and fairness was unquestionable. But Ms. McLachlin burned that very legacy by lending her reputation to a sham court run at the mercy of China's repressive and authoritarian regime.
The new report is the latest to call for the resignation of nine foreign part-time judges currently serving on Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal (CFA). The report, written by activists Alyssa Fong and Samuel Bickett, says the 2020 National Security Act and the introduction of Article 23 in 2024, which gives authorities greater powers to detain, prosecute and prosecute, nominally claims that Hong Kong's independent judiciary has been undermined. Imprisonment. The report's authors argue that foreign judges “lend their prestige to a judicial system that has been undermined and exploited by the Chinese government's relentless efforts to maintain complete control over Hong Kong.” .
This is not a new observation. In March 2022, then British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss announced that, following a review, those working for British judges would no longer serve on the CFA in Hong Kong. In May 2022, more than 50 diaspora groups and non-governmental organizations signed an open letter calling on foreign non-permanent judges to resign from the court, saying their presence “contributes to the human rights abuse campaigns of the Hong Kong and Chinese governments.” It just justifies it.” Demolish all vestiges of political freedom and democracy in the city. ”
In the same month, a number of international judicial scholars, including Canada's Irwin Kotler, signed a legal opinion detailing the systemic threats to judicial independence in Hong Kong, giving part-time judges the ability to exert moderate influence over Hong Kong. He pointed out that his abilities are not sufficient. The courts are “limited.” (This is an understatement. China's government-appointed chief executive can decide which judges hear cases involving Hong Kong's national security law. Media mogul and Beijing's harshest critic There are no foreign judges to hear the case of Mr. Jimmy Lai, who faces death and will be sent to prison on charges under the national security law.
Since joining CFA in 2018, McLachlin has been asked what exactly she has in mind by participating in a justice system that sends people to prison for simply clapping. And her answer is always the same. She and her fellow eight foreign part-time judges are a bulwark against repression. They provide the ultimate checks and balances against state overreach (but only when cases are brought before the CFA and when foreign judges are allowed to hear cases involving national security laws) . and that the court remains completely independent (apart from all evidence cited in the reports, letters and legal opinions referred to above).
McLachlin told CBC News in June 2022 that there is no government influence over the judiciary. “If there was, I wouldn't be there,” she said. However, Fung and Bicket noted in their report that the Chinese government can and has used its “interpretative” powers under Hong Kong's Basic Law and National Security Law to overturn CFA decisions. ing. Most recently, it used the system to overturn a CFA ruling that said Jimmy Lai could be represented by a British lawyer. However, Ms McLachlin has not yet tendered her resignation.
In fact, she continued to serve the court throughout Beijing's detention of Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, contributing to both her reputation and Canada's. She remained in that position during China's bogus ban on canola and pork products from Canada. And despite everything we learned during the course of the public inquiry into foreign interference into China's efforts to meddle in Canadian elections, she is currently not publicly displaying her ambivalence. If she were a sane person, she would not be able to listen to that evidence and accept it, while at the same time believing that the Chinese government would leave Hong Kong's judiciary alone. Why would China go to great lengths to intervene in Canada's democratic process while respecting the boundaries and independence of Hong Kong's courts? It completely defies logic.
It is naive and narcissistic to claim that the mirage of credibility that Ms. McLachlin provides the court actually provides some tangible benefit to the people of Hong Kong. In fact, it's quite the opposite. She is lending her honor to a corrupt system that perpetuates her injustices, and trafficking Canada's with it.
Even if she were to resign when her term ends in June, it would be too late many years later.
