Judge Gérard Dugré’s conduct undermined public confidence in the judiciary and he cannot continue in office, the council says.
Article content
OTTAWA — The Judicial Council of Canada is recommending that a Quebec Superior Court judge be removed from office for what it calls gross misconduct.
Announcement 2
Article content
The council said in a statement on Monday that after an investigation, it concluded that Judge Gérard Dugré’s conduct undermined public confidence in the judiciary and he cannot continue in office.
Article content
In July, an investigative committee recommended that he be removed from his position due to “aggressive and unpleasant” attitudes towards lawyers and parties and chronic delays in decision-making. Following that report, the board also considered submissions from Dugré’s attorney before publishing his final recommendation.
A quorum of 25 members of the judicial council upheld the committee’s conclusion and recommended to federal Justice Minister David Lametti that the judge be removed for conduct that was “blatantly and profoundly destructive of the concept of impartiality, integrity and independence.”
Announcement 3
Article content
Under Canada’s Constitution, the attorney general must seek the approval of both the House of Commons and the Senate before removing a federally appointed judge from office.
Dugré, appointed as a judge in 2009, did not testify during the 38 days of hearings in 2021, but presented evidence that he had a unique style on the stand. More than 60 witnesses appeared in the investigation. Dugré’s secretary, who testified on his behalf, told the committee that the judge used humor and anecdotes to reassure people. Other witnesses said that he was compassionate, courteous and a great conciliator.
The council noted that Dugré had made positive contributions to the administration of justice and resolved a number of cases through judicial conciliation. But he also said his behavior in court was “unacceptable.”
Announcement 4
Article content
In one custody case, Dugré threatened to send a father to a cell for failing to disclose documents, telling him that the court had cells for women with hungry mice and separate cells full of hungry rats for men.
In a conciliation case, Dugré suggested that the former spouses reconcile and give their child up for adoption or place him in a foster family. The couple was trying to decide if their son should change schools. The board agreed with the committee that while these comments were not to be taken at face value, one could reasonably conclude that they reflected a type of bullying.
Other complaints included accusations that Dugré made inappropriate and demeaning comments in court, repeatedly interrupted attorneys and created a chaotic atmosphere by speaking out during proceedings on topics such as transgender people, the Montreal Canadiens and a lawsuit against the Montreal comedy festival. Montreal Just for Laughs.
Announcement 5
Article content
“Judge Dugré’s behavior in court was unacceptable,” the council said, repeating the inquiry committee’s terms such as “shocking,” “bullying” and “unpleasant and often aggressive.”
“It demonstrates a significant lack of respect for the parties and attorneys and, in some cases, demonstrated a lack of objectivity,” the council said.
The council said a pattern of unreasonable delays in sentencing, with a significant number taking more than six months and some more than a year, was another reason that made him unfit for the job. He said that unreasonable delays in issuing the decision negatively affect public confidence in the judiciary, adding that the parties are entitled to timely rulings.
“The evidence establishes a consistent pattern, through almost the entirety of his judicial career, that was not resolved despite the involvement of two chief justices, an associate chief justice, and a mentor,” the council wrote. “This demonstrates an unwillingness or inability to address a chronic problem.”