I read that the Cape Breton mayor, John Morgan, is being charged by the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society for lawyerly misconduct. This charge comes after he proved unsuccessful in his bid to sue the provincial government for unfair distribution of federal equalization funding. Commenting that he felt that he must go outside the province to receive an unbiased ruling is apparently a no-no. Or at least, the person who ran to the barristers society to tattletale on him thinks it is.
There is something about this that bothers me. Although Morgan is a lawyer (non-practicing at this time), , he was acting and speaking as the Mayor. And, just the fact that the Supreme Court of Canada does exist to hear cases that cannot be resolved within their own region shows that the federal government agrees with Morgan. So, why is he being charged? It seems petty and devious. It makes me think that he is being targeted, perhaps punished, for daring to complain that Cape Breton is not being treated fairly by the Nova Scotia government.
It bothers me because John Morgan is not only a mayor and a lawyer, but he is a citizen who has the same rights as I do, I would think. If he can be strong-armed or punished for speaking out against unfair treatment by the province than so can I.
—Blondie
This article appears in Nov 12-18, 2009.
I’d like to mention that the NS Barrister’s Society is a self-regulating group, and has no government affiliation, nor does it take direction from the government. I’d imagine, if there was misconduct, there probably is.
It would, to me, depend on what capacity he was speaking. If as mayor, then the Bar Association should shove it. If he was speaking as a lawyer, then the Bar Association has the right. It seems in this case he was speaking as the mayor.
I don’t know, Dr. Fever, lawyers’ can have party affiliations and political aspirations that may create biases when it comes to ruling on stuff like this. Wouldn’t it be Morgan’s own political views that got him accused? I mean, if his err was saying that he couldn’t get an unbiased judgment in the province that he is charging, wouldn’t that be a standard complaint of a complainant (who happens to be a lawyer)?
HKM— as a someone who works under a group like this professionally (in my case the Mutual Funds Dealer’s Association) which is very similar to the Barrister Assoc., I can say that political aspirations within the group may be common, however, if political decisions are being made, the leadership is quickly questioned. These groups have worked hard to maintain what oversight they have amongst themselves, considering the increasingly stringent regulatory environment. So taking a chance by making a political decision creates infighting, especially if you have people that support your side.
That said, one could think that they (the province and the assoc.) could conspire to bring him down, but the federal oversight would come down on them so quickly if they were to do so. I think we’re not getting the full story.
Fuck Cape Breton…they have been leeching off mainland NS for way too long. What have they done for us lately?
Leeching off of Mainland NS…amazing…
Nova Scotia (which includes CB by the way) receives Federal equalization payments. Some people (not all) believe that CB is not receiving their fair share of that equalization payment. They believe that Mainland NS is keeping a large part of the money to themself and therefore has hindered the growth of CB. Now I don’t particularly agree with that. Being from CB I think that no amount of money is going to change what is happening there. You can’t blame the people, they work hard to provide for their families. Industry just simply cannot and does not thrive in the area.
In relation to the John Morgan issue. The man was speaking as Mayor. But the Society beleive he was making a prejudiced and insulting comment regarding the NS Judicial system; given that he is a lawyer, they take offence to that. Maybe they are right, Maybe they are wrong. I personally think the whole issue is a waste of time and money.
John Morgan was not saying anything that a majority of people in NS, especially those who have experienced it, already think about the judiciary.
He has the right to free speech, regardless of who he is.
For the NSBS to take him to task rather than clean up their act as lawyers and judges is pretty much an admission that he was right.
“During the 1980s, however, the Supreme Court itself was put on trial. Federal Justice Minister Jean Chretien referred the case of Mi’kmaq teenager Donald Marshall Jr., who served 11 years in prison for a 1971 murder in Sydney, to the Appeal Division for review. The court acquitted Marshall but insisted any miscarriage of justice was “more apparent than real” despite growing evidence of misconduct by police and prosecutors. The Nova Scotia government established a royal commission, headed by three out-of-province judges, to investigate the case and the province’s justice system. The commission’s 1990 report condemned systemic racism and political influence in the province’s justice system.”
http://www.courts.ns.ca/history/supremecou…