Supreme Court Chief Justice Antonio Lamer
Antonio Lamer startled the legal world when he resigned as chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada in 1999 with nine years left in his term. Twelve years later, the story behind the surprise departure of the country's top judge reveals a tale of intrigue and apprehension at the highest levels of the Supreme Court.
Alarmed by the chief justice's wandering concentration and a fall on the stairs of an Ottawa restaurant, the other eight Supreme Court judges banded together and gave him a gentle prod toward the door.
Besides shedding light on a fascinating chapter in Supreme Court history, the story of chief justice Lamer's departure opens a window into a world rarely glimpsed. Outside of the cloistered world of the judiciary, there has been precious little public discussion about the delicate question of what happens to a judge whose health and performance falters.
The judges were intent on showing respect to a jurist who had played a pivotal role in fleshing out a broad span of individual rights under the Charter. They selected a delegation of three veteran judges who embodied experience, candour and impartiality.
"We didn't ask him to resign," recalled former Supreme Court judge John Major, one of the three who attended the ultra-sensitive meeting with their chief. "We merely said that his performance was not what it had been up until this time. … He said instantly: 'Well, then I'll resign.' "
Chief justice Lamer's colleagues had become increasingly alarmed by his lapses of concentration and what they describe now as waning enthusiasm. They were also jolted by a frightening fall he had on the stairs of a favourite Ottawa restaurant, an incident that prompted RCMP chauffeurs to warn the Mounties' court detachment that chief justice Lamer should be watched.
Chief justice Lamer did not retire after that initial meeting in February, 1999. But rumours continued to swirl about his alcohol consumption and shaky focus. Prescription drugs to treat a heart condition and an orthostatic tremor in his leg also appear to have played a major role in his apparent decline.
While a new book on the court - Mighty Judgment, by Philip Slayton - alleges that chief justice Lamer was drinking heavily toward the end of his time on the court, Mr. Major said there was more to it than that.
"Ordinarily he'd be more of a participant," Mr. Major said. "By that, I mean that he'd ask more questions, seemingly take more interest, be more involved in the discussion about the case when we were doing that. All that participation seemed to wane. He just wasn't as keen and as active as he had been."
The court had become increasingly factionalized, overworked and demoralized, added a court insider, who asked to remain anonymous.
"The court itself was in turmoil and the chief really was struggling," he said. "The chief wasn't himself. He was drinking a fair bit and he wasn't behaving or contributing in his usual way. He was having trouble not just managing stairs, but he was having trouble managing the court."
Late that spring, several weeks after the delegation had made its first tentative approach, a trio of judges - Mr. Major, Mr. Justice Peter Cory and Mr. Justice Charles Gonthier - returned to press chief justice Lamer more firmly about his failing capacity.
It had a profound effect on him. In an emotional speech to the Canadian Bar Association in mid-August, chief justice Lamer said he intended to resign the following January.
"It really was time for him to resign, given his health, whether it was too much wine, too long on the job, too generally ill," Mr. Major said.
"I think the judges speaking to him caused him to reflect on his own circumstances and his time at the court," the insider said. "I think that, sorry as he was to go, he accepted that he should. It was a sad thing to witness and to be part of, but I think the court handled it extremely well."
The composition of the delegation showed how much care the eight judges put into crafting their approach to their leader, the insider said. "They were very specifically selected as being judges who had nothing to gain by speaking to the chief," he said. "Not one of them was looking for his job. So it was not like Lamer could say: 'I know what you want - you want the vacancy.' "
The court's inner circle remained mum out of respect for chief justice Lamer. However, with the passage of time - and Mr. Lamer's death four years ago - many are now prepared to talk about it.
Outwardly, there was never much logic to the chief justice's unanticipated exit. Well short of his mandatory retirement age, he was not a spent force who longed for rest and relaxation. Indeed, upon retiring, Mr. Lamer joined a large law firm and headed a high-profile inquiry into several wrongful convictions in Newfoundland.
Moreover, chief justice Lamer told The Globe and Mail just days before he first met with the delegation of his fellow judges that he had no intention of retiring. "Not as long as I have the love of law and the sacre feu - my sacred fire," he said in the interview. "I'm like a baseball player. I am having fun."
A spokesman for the Canadian Judicial Council, Johanna Laporte, said that the CJC has occasionally examined the capacity of a judge based on a complaint from a fellow judge. In almost every case, a judge found incapable of functioning properly opted to resign after it was brought to his attention.
The federal minister of justice also has the ability to place a judge on long-term leave through an order-in-council, Ms. Laporte said.
Mr. Major denied a claim in Mr. Slayton's book that the judges moved to limit the questions chief justice Lamer asked during oral hearings in a landmark case over Quebec's ability to secede from Confederation.
"That didn't happen," Mr. Major said. "What was agreed was we wouldn't interrupt council until the end of the day. We'd save the questions and ask them all at once."
Other sources confirmed that the unusual manner of questioning was designed to prevent reporters jumping on chance comments by particular judges as evidence that the court was leaning in a particular direction on the explosive case.
"I wouldn't dispute that the decision not to take questions was motivated in part by concerns about the chief justice, but I don't think that was the only consideration," said one source.
A towering legal figure in his time, Antonio Lamer was appointed to the Quebec Superior Court in 1969 at the age of 36. He spent 20 years on the Supreme Court, the last 10 as its chief justice.
A renowned legal reformer, he believed strongly in the rights of the accused and was determined to breathe life into the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Chief justice Lamer suffered four strokes between retiring and his death in 2007 at the age of 74.
His son, Stéphane Lamer, acknowledged that his father was unwell in the latter stages of his career and was taking heart medication that made him extremely tired at times. However, he denied that his father was a heavy drinker.
"Medication was quite heavy on a few occasions, and heavy medications can have some consequences," he said.
Stéphane Lamer, an international human-rights consultant, questioned why Mr. Slayton's allegations were not made while his father was alive to defend himself. However, he expressed confidence that his father's body of work will outweigh any potential damage to his reputation.
"My father wrote the judgments that he wrote," he said. "Some are still part of our law today. People appreciate what my father has done. If some do not, so be it."
Mr. Slayton said he felt it was important to include the information in his book, which was released earlier this month, because they're part of the "broader context and tapestry of the court."
"It's no secret … that during the period in question, relations between some of the justices were not all that great and that was part of the world they lived in and the world that they worked in at that time," Mr. Slayton said. "So I think any light that can be shed on that is good."