Author Topic: Chief military judge charged  (Read 14854 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 207,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,477
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Top military judge to face court martial overseen by own deputy
« Reply #50 on: June 11, 2019, 12:53:05 »
There does not seem to be a lot of depth from which to find a military judge who does not have a direct working relationship to the CMJ.  Besides the DCMJ, there are only three military judges.  And would most of a small Legal Branch (the senior members anyway) not fall within the same criteria of being "too close to both his client and many of the witnesses who will be called to testify".   Maybe this is one of those situations that could make use of the Supplementary Reserve, if that organization had any credibility or a usable database.

We all start in the same pool of legal officers and when I first transferred to the branch (back in 84) it was a fairly intimate little group but since then the branch has been a growth industry and now numbers several hundreds and folks all know each other although that doesn't mean they are necessarily intimate friends.

Once a legal officer is made a judge, however, they and the bulk of the branch tend to go their separate ways. That's not unlike when a civilian lawyer from a particular law society is made a judge in that province.  Unfortunately, while the legal branch is larger than PEI's bar and a bit smaller than NFLDs and a lot smaller than everyone else, it is all considered part of the same firm (with the exception of DDCS).

Generally civilian judges will not hear cases involving lawyers from the same firm that they served in and it's not too hard to find an "untainted" judge. I expect since Dutil is fighting this thing, we'll eventually be told by the Court Martial Appeal Court as to whether the oath of office is a sufficient enough provision to rely upon. Like I said above, we need to add a legislative provision to ad hoc an outside judge for these very extreme cases (which might extend as far as all legal officer defendants and not just judges)

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Privateer

    Looking for the bubble.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 19,230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 354
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #51 on: June 11, 2019, 16:25:46 »
Here is a provision from the BC Provincial Court Act that would be a good addition to the National Defence Act to address this type of situation:

Quote
Temporary judge

8   The chief judge may appoint a person as a judge of the court for

(a) a period of time set out in the appointment, or

(b) a specific case or class of cases set out in the appointment,

or both, if

(c) the appointee is a provincial court judge, as defined in the Criminal Code, in a province other than British Columbia, and

(d) the chief judge of or the person who holds the equivalent office of the chief judge of the provincial court in the other province consents to the appointment.

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 465,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,848
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #52 on: June 18, 2019, 10:54:25 »
A spectacular implosion yesterday, as the presiding judge recused himself, and stated that the other three members of the military bench are also unable to preside.

https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/13109/court-martial-of-top-military-judge-collapses-current-military-judges-can-t-try-case

This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 88,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,646
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #53 on: June 18, 2019, 12:22:58 »
Call me a cynic but why am I not surprised?

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 88,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,646
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #54 on: June 18, 2019, 20:44:50 »
Another really cool ruling he made was Col Dutil could choose not to have to wear DEU as the accused like the rest of us (Dutil M. (Colonel), R. v.) because being a military judge trumps being a service member and the same rules don't apply for dress either. 

Truly, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
« Last Edit: June 18, 2019, 20:57:51 by garb811 »

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 207,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,477
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #55 on: June 18, 2019, 22:12:11 »
Another really cool ruling he made was Col Dutil could choose not to have to wear DEU as the accused like the rest of us (Dutil M. (Colonel), R. v.) because being a military judge trumps being a service member and the same rules don't apply for dress either.

Truly, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."


If you are going to paraphrase a ruling please do it accurately. The ruling (as translated from the French by Google actually says the following:

Quote
[ 17 ] I wish to reiterate, as someone so aptly put it, that no one is above the law, which includes a military judge. The effect of my decision is one of necessity. Independence and judicial impartiality are fundamental principles to the function of military judge and must be applied at all times by the person who has been appointed to occupy it. An authorization was given by the Chief Military Judge to military judges to apply these principles to the conduct of the CAF for military judges. In order to preserve the function of a military judge, it goes without saying, in my opinion, that the exercise of discretion based on such principles must remain applicable in the circumstances.

[ 18 ] I believe that it is necessary for any military judge to be able to exercise his discretion as to what he or she should wear before a court martial. My decision, therefore, is not to exonerate Colonel Dutil from wearing the uniform, but rather to allow him to exercise his discretion as a military judge on this issue, as would any other military judge who would appear before the court martial as an accused. It is simply a matter of making sense of the principles of independence and judicial impartiality in the exercise of the function of military judge by a CAF officer, nothing more, nothing less. This is what a proper administration of justice requires in my opinion in the circumstances.

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 465,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,848
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #56 on: June 18, 2019, 22:30:10 »
Given the train wreck over which he has presided, I will not defer to the the judge in this case.  A Court Martial is inherently a military proceeding;the only appropriate attire for a serving member who is charged is a uniform.

This farce may have irreparably damaged the military justice system; granting judges special dispensation because they are judges only worsens the issue.  Perhaps parliament will take appropriate action and abolish the military bench, and refer all court martials to the Federal Court, where we can have competent jurists exercising their role, and not the pompous, overpaid and underworked former members of the JAG with overly well developed sense of self importance.  You know, the ones who presided over ludicrous findings like those in R v Nauss.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 88,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,646
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #57 on: June 18, 2019, 22:31:35 »
If you are going to paraphrase a ruling please do it accurately. The ruling (as translated from the French by Google actually says the following:

 :cheers:
You might not agree with me, but I stand by it.

Quote
...
It is simply a matter of making sense of the principles of independence and judicial impartiality in the exercise of the function of military judge by a CAF officer, nothing more, nothing less.
...

He isn't exercising the function of a military judge, he is parading in front of a military judge as a CAF officer accused of some fairly significant offences. The fact that he is a military judge should have zero bearing on the decision being made; making this ruling and wording it as he did makes it very clear the military judges think they are distinct and separate from the rest of us.

Offline Ostrozac

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 32,840
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 724
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #58 on: June 18, 2019, 22:56:45 »
A Court Martial is inherently a military proceeding

We’ve made exceptions to that, though, when we court martial civilians. Most commonly veterans, for crimes committed while in service (I remember a certain BGen who just seemed to like being court martialed, his first one while serving, his second as a civilian). But I seem to remember that members of the civil service deployed to Afghanistan were also subject to the Code of Service Discipline, and Court Martial if necessary. Do we need to remove the concept of a chain of command from Military Judges and make them a Junta or Collective of Equals — all technically Defence Civilians vice Commissioned Officers, so they can sit in judgement on each other?

Nonetheless, this isn’t a good development. No one can be seen to be above the law.

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 88,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,646
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #59 on: June 18, 2019, 23:33:48 »
Those aren't exceptions, they are specifically accounted for in the NDA and do not change the nature or conduct of the CM.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 207,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,477
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #60 on: June 19, 2019, 17:49:24 »
...
He isn't exercising the function of a military judge, he is parading in front of a military judge as a CAF officer accused of some fairly significant offences. The fact that he is a military judge should have zero bearing on the decision being made; making this ruling and wording it as he did makes it very clear the military judges think they are distinct and separate from the rest of us.

We’ve made exceptions to that, though, when we court martial civilians. Most commonly veterans, for crimes committed while in service (I remember a certain BGen who just seemed to like being court martialed, his first one while serving, his second as a civilian). But I seem to remember that members of the civil service deployed to Afghanistan were also subject to the Code of Service Discipline, and Court Martial if necessary. Do we need to remove the concept of a chain of command from Military Judges and make them a Junta or Collective of Equals — all technically Defence Civilians vice Commissioned Officers, so they can sit in judgement on each other?

Nonetheless, this isn’t a good development. No one can be seen to be above the law.

The fact of the matter is that we have put military judges into a special category as individuals who function outside of the chain of command for very valid reasons. Specifically so that they are as immune from command influence as anyone can possibly be.

Most of you may not remember the turmoil that followed the institution of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the various interpretations that existed respecting the s 11(d) requirements for an independent and impartial tribunal. There was a lot of trial and error in refining the system (both before and after R v. Genereux in the SCC https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/836/index.do?q=%22court+martial%22) that went into creating the system that we have now.

Quite frankly I'm much more concerned about the fact that our legislation does not adequately provide for an outside judge to come in when a conflict exists rather than if people are wearing the right buttons and bows in front of the court. You can't have it both ways. Either our judges are independent of the chain of command and the Chief Judge has the discretion to decide to what judges wear in certain circumstances or they are bound to obey every little whim of the chain of command such as what buttons and bows to wear. Buttons and bows are small beer in the much bigger scheme of things (and quite personally I think the Chief Judge made the wrong call in deciding to wear a suit rather than a uniform and think he did this for selfish reasons just as I think his call to fight this case in the first instance by challenging the bench is a selfish act which he ought to know would put the very system he's sworn to uphold into disrepute)

As to the idea of having the trial held by a Federal Judge all that I can say is that for all intents and purposes our military bench is already a federal court albeit one which has experience within the military and with military law which the Federal Court bench does not have (in fact much of the Federal Court bench has little or no experience with even ordinary civilian criminal law as those cases are handled primarily by the various levels of the provincial benches) One of the main reasons I personally favour a military bench is it's portability. Military judges can sit anywhere including in forward operational zones if necessary or desirable.

Let's face it folks, this case has turned into a kick in the groin for our justice system and it's undoubtedly giving us a black eye but let's not loose focus. Are military judges different from the rest of us (or you)? - damn right. They're supposed to be so that they can do their job fairly. Does it matter what the accused judge wears in court? - not one wit. Does it matter that this particular judge is taking a system for a ride because someone had forgotten to make legislative provisions for the trial of a judge- bloody hell yes. Let's fix that and quickly.

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 465,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,848
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #61 on: June 19, 2019, 18:00:15 »
Does it matter what the accused judge wears in court? - not one wit.

I'll respectfully disagree.  Military charges are different.  There is a concept called the profession of arms.  A Military judge remains a Military member; a court martial is in part the self regulation of the profession of arms.

If the chief Military judge has decided that he is not part and parcel of the profession of arms, then he should, respectfully, resign from the Military bench.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline ModlrMike

    : Riding time again... woohooo!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 217,889
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,891
    • Canadian Association of Physician Assistants
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #62 on: June 19, 2019, 18:00:58 »
While I agree with most of what you say, there remains the issue that Military Judges are effectively two people at the same time. They're judges, and their serving members. On the one hand, they need to remain divorced from the chain of command, but I contend that applies primarily to judicial matters. In matters of dress, comportment, or other statutory regulations under the NDA or QR&O, they should be treated like any other serving member.

This is no different than we medical folk who have complete authority on medical issues, but are still subject to the CSD, NDA, QR&O etc in all other circumstances.

Yes, military judges are special, but as serving members they're no more special than the rest of us.
WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may create the illusion that you are tougher,smarter, faster and better looking than most people.
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. (H.L. Mencken 1919)
Zero tolerance is the politics of the lazy. All it requires is that you do nothing and ban everything.

Offline JesseWZ

  • Directing Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 44,675
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 566
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #63 on: June 19, 2019, 18:33:21 »

This is no different than we medical folk who have complete authority on medical issues, but are still subject to the CSD, NDA, QR&O etc in all other circumstances.


And MP's when conducting an investigation, and a host of other folks who retain some independence from the chain of command on some issues but are still subject to the listed above. The authority for medical folk to be the authority in medical matters is hard coded into orders - same with MPs conducting policing duties.

In this case, the Accused is not performing duties related to his position he's simply another service member subject to the same authorities as the rest of us - no different then if I were to attend CBRN training. CBRN training has nothing to do with my role in the machine, but the expectation is I'm properly turned out in the expected dress - not showing up in a suit and tie because I'm special. The "I'm special" attitude is dangerous, and cancerous to a professional armed force.
I will be seen and not heard... I will be seen and not heard... I will be seen and not heard...

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 226,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,950
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #64 on: June 19, 2019, 18:49:38 »
A Court Martial is inherently a military proceeding;the only appropriate attire for a serving member who is charged is a uniform.

While I don't disagree, unless I'm reading the ref's/reg's incorrectly, there is leeway for the participant (accused):

CFP 265, Ch 2, Sect 1, Para 46 "Wear of civilian robes"

46.  Ecclesiastical, judicial, and academic clothing may be worn over an appropriate order of dress, or in lieu of uniform:

b.  by judge advocates or presidents of courts martial (dress of participating members of a court martial shall be as prescribed in A-LG-007-000/AG-001, Court Martial Procedures. Guide for Participants and Members of the Public);

Court Martial Procedures Guide for participants and members of the public

Dress

3. Orders of dress for participating military members, listed at para 8, are as prescribed by the Chief Military Judge. For military participants, Service Dress Nº 3 (tunic with ribbons) will be worn unless otherwise specified by the military judge presiding at the court martial. Headdress is worn by participating military members until after the pleas have been entered but may be removed earlier at the discretion of the military judge. Headdress is also worn for the pronouncement of findings and sentence. At other times during the proceedings, headdress is not worn except for military witnesses who are called to testify.


Isn't this what is being discussed, a situation where the Presiding Judge said a participating military member (the Accused IAW para 8 ) *otherwise specified* dress allowed to be a suit vice Service Dress No. 3?
« Last Edit: June 19, 2019, 19:26:58 by Eye In The Sky »
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 207,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,477
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #65 on: June 19, 2019, 19:25:17 »
Note that I've never used the word "special" (I'll leave that to the "special" forces). I have used the word "different" insofar as it applies to their independence from the chain of command which is critical to the function of their job.

What I think you are missing the point on is that their "difference" is legislatively authorized by virtue of s 165 of the NDA. They are appointed by the GiC and as was stated in the 1999 JAG Annual Report when the revisions to the system was made:

Quote
Under the current reformed military justice system, the military judges are independent from the military chain of command, the executive and the Departmental authorities and the Judge Advocate General
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/D1-16-2000E.pdf page 12.

There is an entirely separate statutory system for selecting, reappointing, paying and disciplining military judges from that which applies to the rest of us. True, they are still members of the military and that's why they can be tried for a CSD offence but that's quite different from being subject to many of the details of military service imposed by the CoC.

Remember what the trial judge in this case said about the uniform issue: it wasn't for him to give Dutil permission not to wear a uniform, what he was doing was acknowledging that Dutil was innocent until proven guilty and as such still had the discretion as the Chief Military Judge to follow the directive that he (Dutil) had previously issued about the wearing of civilian clothes by military judges as a sign of their judicial independence and impartiality. In other words, Dutil, as the OIC of an independent unit could make his own decision about the appropriate clothing to wear.

Sorry guys. I know that there are some minds that can't be changed about this and while I personally think the whole idea that wearing civilian clothes as a sign of judicial independence and impartiality is tenuous at best, I do appreciate that others (especially amongst the judges and defence counsel services) see it differently and quite frankly I would hate to see a case like this founder because a judge ordered Dutil to wear a uniform and thus in the mind of some civilian appeal judge up the chain hold that the military courts are not truly independent. Sometimes hard facts make bad law.

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 465,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,848
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #66 on: June 19, 2019, 19:51:02 »
Except Dutil, as an accused, is not present in court in his capacity as a military judge.  He is there in his capacity as a member of the CAF.


Agreed that bad cases make bad law. 


Hopefully this will be the impetus for another top to bottom reform, which will abolish the military judiciary and put the responsibility for courts-martial under the federal court.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 88,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,646
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #67 on: June 19, 2019, 20:36:44 »
Let's try this from a different angle...

Why was the first motion brought by the defense the one on dress? Why did they not simply cut to the chase and make the motion that the military judge recuse himself due to his inability to be unbiased and impartial? What precedent was the defense setting with that motion and why was it so important that it they wanted it to be dealt with first?


Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 218,525
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,250
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #68 on: June 19, 2019, 20:55:17 »
I am less concerned about the allowable variance to service dress for the Accused, as I am for the seeming catch-22 about judgeship. Perhaps if consideration is given for the actual charges and how ‘uniquely military’ they are (or aren’t), then consideration could be given to the NDA to allow a non-military Federal judge to preside as an exceptional case.  ???

Regards
G2G

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 226,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,950
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #69 on: June 19, 2019, 20:58:15 »
Question;  why is this the important issue of focus (DEU/suit)?

The CDS delegated authority to the CMJ, the CMJ further delegates to Presiding Judge.  It is authorized. Unless I'm missing some significance ( which I could be...), my mind says "who cares?".  All the "this is wrong" etc...take it up with the AFC and CAF Dress Committee, recommend the CDS revise the applic part from Ch 2.

Here's the thing;  when the CDS issues dress reg's/changes and then sub-ordinate commanders try to put their own spin on it or ignore it, we complain (eg BEARDFORGEN).  When people make decisions (like this DEU/suit one) that are authorized from the top thru clear delegation...we complain.

 :dunno:
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 121,139
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,267
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #70 on: June 19, 2019, 21:00:22 »
Who cares about the dress. We have the top judge who may have committed fraud and we have no way of conducting a trial!

It's a joke! 

Online Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 178,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,352
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #71 on: June 19, 2019, 21:50:17 »
I'm still waiting for someone to argue that we should get the RCMP to preside over military courts martial, just like we want to give them military policing too!
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 301,961
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,094
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #72 on: June 19, 2019, 21:59:08 »
Treat it like a summary trial.

He's guilty. Next ;)
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 88,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,646
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #73 on: June 19, 2019, 22:17:52 »
Sorry for the crappy Google translation but...
Quote
In my opinion, and in keeping with the logic of the uniforms and civilian clothing directive for military judges that he himself authorized, it remains essential that he continue to exercise his discretion. in this regard. Without presuming the result of this court martial in any way, the fact remains that the presumption of innocence remains until the prosecution has presented evidence that convinces the trier of fact of its guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. To allow Colonel Dutil to exercise his discretion will only be a benefit of the application of this presumption and will allow him to evaluate the most appropriate way, in his opinion, to preserve the principles of independence and independence. impartiality essential to the exercise of his function as a military judge. Indeed, why should someone be deprived of the opportunity to make the usual decisions to preserve his position simply because he is being tried before the court martial?

For me, the ruling is important because the accused was being treated differently than any other accused before a court martial from the get go, for the sole reason that he has been appointed as a military judge. Further, the presiding judge referenced a policy the accused himself had made in rendering his decision... Really?

Again, the accused was NOT acting as a military judge and presiding at a court martial. He was the f...ing accused at his own court martial and the presiding military judge is worried about the accused being able to, "...preserve the principles of independence and independence. impartiality essential to the exercise of his function as a military judge." Sorry, that ship sailed when there were reasonable and probable grounds to charge him with service and criminal offences.  At that point he should be treated as Col Dutil, CAF, not Col Dutil, CMJ and the presiding military judge should have treated him the same way he has treated every other accused service member who has appeared before him instead of showing deference to his appointment as a military judge and deciding that warranted special treatment.

It just adds another level of the grotesquely surreal to the whole fiasco.

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 88,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,646
Re: Chief military judge charged
« Reply #74 on: July 19, 2019, 15:00:41 »
And the next step is taken, the appeal has been filed to overturn the ruling. It's a short article so nothing further at the link:

Prosecutors try to get top military judge's trial back on track
Quote
OTTAWA — Prosecutors are going to court to try to force Canada’s No. 2 military judge to name another military judge to preside over the trial of the No. 1 military judge.

A month ago, Lt.-Col. Louis-Vincent d’Auteuil removed himself from the case of his boss, Col. Mario Dutil, in the middle of a court martial, and refused to appoint a replacement.

Dutil was facing four charges in relation to allegations he had an inappropriate relationship with a subordinate and signed a false travel claim.

His lawyer asked d’Auteuil to recuse himself and served him with a subpoena as a witness, because the two men worked together and had a personal relationship and d’Auteuil knew important facts about the case as a result.

After considering the matter, d’Auteuil agreed and said that for similar reasons, none of the other three military judges could handle the case, either, leaving it in limbo.

Maj. Doug Keirstead, a spokesman for the Canadian Forces, said Thursday that the government is asking the Federal Court to overturn that decision.

The application says d’Auteuil was wrong to conclude that none of the other judges could take the case over, and in any event the legal doctrine of necessity demands that d’Auteuil pick the best one available no matter what.