Ms Hazel J. Magnussen has been elected to the board of directors of The Canadian Justice Review Board.
Hazel Joan Magnussen, a graduate of the University of Alberta, is a retired registered nurse with 35 years experience in health care. Her primary clinical focus in the last ten years was mental health nursing and her articles about nursing ethics and nurse-physician relationships have been published in various professional journals. In addition, she has written articles and presented papers on 'bullying' and 'disruptive behaviour in the workplace', and detailed the experience and needs of victims of crime in the criminal justice process.

At its annual general meeting held June 12, 2007, the Canadian Justice Review Board (CJRB)
elected Ms. Hazel Magnussen of Victoria, British Columbia to its board of directors. Mr. Bruce Haines, J.D. Q.C. was elected chairman; Mr. Wallace Craig vice-chairman; and Ms Lynne Cohen secretary treasurer. Mr. David Kahn becomes the immediate past chairman . William D. Nichol is the executive director.

Mr. Bruce Haines
CHAIRMAN 2007-08: Mr. Bruce Haines Q.C. has 35 years experience as a practicing lawyer, including "Personal Injuries" ,"Wrongful Dismissal" and a variety of other areas such as insurance claims, contract disputes and the defence of lawsuits and claims. He graduated from the University of Toronto in 1958 and in 1961 earned an LL.B degree from the University of Toronto Faculty of Law followed by admission to the Bar in 1963. Mr. Haines Q.C. is certified by the Law Society of Upper Canada as a Specialist in Civil Litigation, and as a Specialist in Family Law. He was appointed Queen's Counsel, Province of Ontario and appointed as an Instructor Bar Admission Course, Criminal Procedure .

retired judge Mr. Wallace G. Craig
VICE-CHAIRMAN 2007-08 : Born and raised in Vancouver, Wallace Gilby Craig graduated from the University of British Columbia faculty of law in 1954. He practiced law from 1955 to 1975.

In 1975 Wallace Craig was appointed to the bench of the Provincial Court of British Columbia (Vancouver Criminal Division). He retired in 2001.

Ms. Lynne Cohen
SECRETARY -TREASURER 2007-08: Ms. Lynne Cohen was called to the Ontario bar in 1994 and has been a freelance journalist for the past 20 years.

As a non-practicing lawyer she has written extensively for Canadian Lawyer, Law Times and, in the 1980s, for the Canadian Medical Association Journal

Chairman's keynote address,

Chairman's Report for 2006-2007

Recently in the National Post, an American diplomat posed the question, "What do you call a country whose leader names every member of his government (and the deputies in ministries), appoints all members of its "upper house", determines who will run for his party, and appoints all judges, ambassadors, and heads of official commissions without further review?"

Diplomatically, he did not supply the answer. However, many of us in the CJRB appreciate all too clearly the nature of the peril to democracy presented by the combination of the unique power of the Prime Minister to select judges of the Supreme Court and the immense additional authority of that court conferred by the 1982 Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.

The foundation of a peaceful and just society is the rule of law. This presupposes that the law and those who administrate it command wide respect. In a country as diverse as Canada is becoming, the perception of what is a just law and what is an authentic human right has become increasingly controversial. Where such divergences of opinion exist, they should be addressed and resolved by the democratic process, that is by means of open discussion, debate, resolutions and free votes within the House of Commons.

The substantial absence of this democratic Parliamentary process has been a major factor in the foundation and growth of your Board. We have seen the rule of law become the rule of lawyers, resulting in a diminished respect not only for the law but also for Parliament that is seen as failing in its fundamental representational legislative role.

The de facto transfer of legislative authority from Parliament to the Court in matters of Human Rights, aided by such devices as the Court Challenges Programme, has been further endorsed by the Chief Justice and some other members of the Supreme Court. They have seized upon the precedent of judicial activism within the common law. This appears to show a readiness to redefine democracy in favour of judicial references to "unwritten rules" that one commentator perceptively described as the divine rule of judges.

In view of the difficulties in achieving constitutional reform in Canada, the most practical way forward is to add to the list of judicial qualifications a thorough understanding of and respect for the democratic process and its embodiment in the form of the House of Commons. Certainly, in my opinion - and I cannot speak for the entire Board - this assessment must be made and appointments ratified by the House of Commons. The assertion that this would compromise the independence of the judiciary in its work does not appear to have a rational basis.

Members of the Board are also concerned with and have special insights into various other aspects of our justice system that are in urgent need of reform. However, the need and objective of restoring to Parliament its role as the crucible of all substantial legislation appears fundamental to addressing these other aspects.

During the past year, your Board has continued to bring these issues to the notice of members and the wider public through copying published reports, letters, articles and speeches on its website. A series of articles by Director Bruce Haines on "how to appeal property assessments" was well received. Monthly reports of activities and the increasing popularity of the website have been prepared and distributed by our Executive Director and founder member William Nichol.

In October, Director C.G. Landolt was active in pressing for the dissolution of the Court Challenges Program, calling it 'an example of government corruption and taxpayer abuse". I supported this in remarks quoted on the CBC Ottawa Morning programme, asserting that it spent its funds largely on pushing highly controversial measures that would not have been endorsed by Parliament.

In November, during the controversy that followed the proposal of the government to slightly widen the judicial selection committee membership, I participated in a televised discussion moderated by Dale Goldhawk on the CPAC parliamentary channel.

In January, Director and past Chairman Professor Rob Martin was appointed to the judicial selection committee for south and eastern Ontario. We extend to him our congratulations. Rob has offered constant encouragement and helpful advice during my term.

In March, Director and retired judge Wallace Craig addressed by invitation the Parliamentary Standing Committee on justice regarding the judicial selection process. He argued strongly in favour of expanding the composition of the judicial selection committees.

The CJRB made a submission to the Treasury Board with the help of the MP for Nepean-Carleton Pierre Poilievre, concerning the evident reluctance of the Judicial Council to publish details of its expenditures that had seen a significant increase. Publication of this information is mandatory under the government's "pro-active" disclosure policy that arose as a result of other misuse of public funds.

The CJRB also made a submission to the House Standing Committee considering the Privacy Commissioner's Report to Parliament, and supplied several pertinent questions to the chair to be addressed by the Commissioner. Considering that misuse of private information held by government is an offence punishable by fine or imprisonment, the CJRB is concerned that the Privacy Commission has never, in its entire history, referred any complaint that it determined to be "well-founded" to the Crown attorney for prosecution. Therefore the Privacy Commission does not appear to act in the public interest.

Finally, the CJRB also made a submission to Parliament concerning the proposed creation of a single "ethics" commissioner for Parliament. Former Director Senator Anne Cools was pleased with the outcome whereby the Senate is assigned its own ethics commissioner, consistent with the constitution.

While I am pleased with everything that has been achieved, I am conscious that there is a long way to go and that we should consider new ways of increasing our impact. It has been an honour to serve as chairman of this distinguished Board and I am most grateful for the unstinting support of the Executive Director, our Treasurer and other Board members.

Yours truly,

David A. Kahn

Chairman 2006-2007