CALGARY — Attorney General Sean Fraser says political donations should neither help nor hinder candidates seeking judicial appointments, but acknowledged he is sometimes alerted to a nominee’s political activities before a final decision is made.Testifying before the House of Commons justice committee, Fraser rejected suggestions that partisan considerations influence appointments to the bench, according to reporting by Blacklock’s Reporter.“I will occasionally receive a note about a candidate after they have come through as being recommended or highly recommended, if they have a particular engagement we are aware of from any political party,” Fraser told MPs.However, he maintained that he does not actively seek out information about candidates’ political affiliations or donation histories.“That is not something I seek information about before making appointments,” Fraser said, adding that such information is sometimes brought forward by aides.The issue arose during questioning from Bloc Québécois MP Rhéal Fortin, who asked whether a so-called “Liberal list” — a database of party donors and supporters that had previously drawn controversy — was still being used during the appointment process.Fortin referenced past allegations that Liberal-connected candidates were screened to avoid political embarrassment after being recommended for judicial positions.“The database is in use by the Liberal Party of Canada,” Fraser replied. “I have never used it during my process of making appointments.”.Conservative MP Roman Baber raised concerns over the number of Liberal donors appointed to the judiciary, citing figures showing that 20% of judges appointed to Québec Superior Court in 2024 had previously donated to the Liberal Party.“Judges appointed to the bench must be above reproach,” Baber said. “A donation to a political party is reflective of one’s political ideology and therefore gives rise to an apprehension of bias.”Fraser disagreed, arguing political participation should not disqualify otherwise qualified candidates from public service.“There have been a number of appointees who have been involved with different political parties since I’ve held this position,” Fraser said. “I don’t think the fact you’ve made a donation to one particular party should serve as either an obligation, nor should it be something that bars you from being appointed.”When pressed by Baber on whether he would commit to avoiding the appointment of past Liberal donors, Fraser declined.“It’s important that we don’t exclude people from opportunities to serve Canada because they’ve engaged in our political process,” he said.Fraser also defended political donations as a form of free expression, warning against assumptions that party involvement compromises judicial independence.“To cast aspersions upon appointees on the basis of their participation in our democracy I think may well violate someone’s opportunity to take part in that democracy, including their freedom of speech,” he said.The attorney general went further, accusing critics of attempting to undermine confidence in the courts.“I do find the line of questioning we just heard to be deeply concerning,” Fraser told the committee. “It seems clear there is at least some attempt to try to have Canadians question the independence of the judiciary based on their political affiliation.”.Fraser defends religious freedom protections under Bill C-9 .Liberal MP James Maloney echoed those concerns, arguing that political donations made before a judicial appointment should not become grounds for questioning a judge’s impartiality.“I practiced in Ontario for 20 years before going into politics,” said Maloney.“Not once did I walk into a courtroom and wonder who appointed the judge or what he or she did politically before.”He described suggestions that judges could be influenced by prior political activity as “outrageous.”The debate comes amid ongoing scrutiny of federal judicial appointments.Among appointees since 2020 are former Winnipeg mayor Brian Bowman, former Ontario Liberal MPP Nathalie Des Rosiers and Toronto Liberal fundraiser Jill Presser, who was known to senior Liberal officials including former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s chief of staff Katie Telford.Other appointments have also attracted attention, including Ontario Superior Court Justice Mohamed Rahman, a personal friend of the federal public safety minister, and Ontario Superior Court Justice Carissima Mathen, who previously worked as a paid consultant to the Prime Minister’s Office before being appointed in 2024.In Québec, Superior Court Justice Philippe Bélanger was appointed after making donations to former attorney general David Lametti’s campaign.In Alberta, Calgary tax lawyer Michael Bourque, who donated $14,497 to Liberal organizers over four years, was appointed to the Court of King’s Bench in 2021. Edmonton lawyer Bob Aloneissi, who donated $2,489, was appointed to the same court in 2022.Questions about political influence in judicial appointments have surfaced before.In 2020, Radio-Canada reported that François Landry, then an adviser to the attorney general, expressed concerns in an internal email about political screening connected to judicial appointments.“Need to talk about what the Prime Minister’s Office requires us to do prior to a judicial appointment,” Landry wrote.“I think we need to be more cautious considering what is happening. I want to protect the Minister.”
