The Law Society of Alberta and the Canadian Bar Association have declined to assist in appointing retired or current judges to oversee the reconfiguration of Alberta’s electoral boundaries. Christopher Samuel, the president of the Alberta division of the Canadian Bar Association, referenced concerns raised by acting Chief Justice of Alberta Dawn Pentelechuk as the basis for this decision.
Acting Chief Justice Pentelechuk expressed reservations about the selection process and chose not to distribute the letter, prompting the Canadian Bar Association to respectfully reject the committee’s request. Samuel emphasized that it is the responsibility of the chief justices to disseminate such notices, and it would not be appropriate for the CBA to bypass their authority.
In the formation of an electoral boundaries commission, which determines voting groups for provincial elections, the chief justices of the Court of King’s Bench and the Court of Appeal usually seek a judge or retired judge to lead the initiative. The last commission’s chair, Justice Dallas Miller, recommended that the legislature adopt the majority report or increase the number of legislative seats to 91 if the former was not feasible before the upcoming general election.
Following this, a special legislative committee, predominantly composed of UCP members, was established by the government to search for a judicial chair for the current endeavor. However, the courts, as per a letter from Pentelechuk, have declined involvement in appointing a chair due to the irregularity of the process, as conveyed by NDP MLA Christina Gray.
UCP MLA Brandon Lunty forwarded a letter from the committee to the Ministry of Justice, the Canadian Bar Association, and the Law Society of Alberta to circulate among current and retired judges. The Law Society of Alberta stated that it respects the chief justices’ authority over their respective courts and would not distribute documents without their specific request.
Committee member and NDP MLA Kathleen Ganley criticized the process as “illegitimate,” expressing concerns that it is designed to favor the UCP’s interests in selecting voters. Ganley emphasized that the decisions of the bar association and law society highlight their respect for the courts and urged the UCP to acknowledge this. The UCP’s objective in forming the committee is to maintain rural representation, as stated by Lunty.
Lunty did not directly address statements from the Law Society and the Canadian Bar Association but mentioned that a meeting to review expressions of interest will be arranged in due course. The deadline for submitting expressions of interest was extended to May 26, and the selected chair is expected to deliver a report to the committee by October 22.