An independent judiciary is an essential element of democracy, but judicial independence should not be taken as immunity from economic pressures. An independent judges’ compensation commission proposed in 2013 that B.C.’s provincial court judges get increases of 2.9 per cent on April 1, 2014, 1.5 per cent the following year and 2.0 per cent in 2016. The government overruled the commission’s recommendations and instead approved increases of 1.0 per cent, 1.5 per cent and 1.5 per cent.
The Provincial Court Judges’ Association has filed a petition against the attorney general in B.C. Supreme Court. The association wants the higher court to issue an order quashing the government’s decision to reject the increases recommended by the compensation commission.
The administration of justice must be free of political influence and other pressures. Matters must be decided impartially on points of law.
But how much judges are paid should be up to those who have to balance budgets, meaning the legislators. Canada’s Constitution Act says: “The salaries, allowances and pensions of the judges of the superior, district and county courts … shall be fixed and provided by the Parliament of Canada.”
The federal government and most provinces have set up independent commissions to make recommendations on judges’ compensation. In B.C., such a commission is formed every three years. Its five members solicit input and study the issue thoroughly before making those recommendations.
But the legislature does not automatically accept those recommendations, nor should it. It is answerable to the electorate and accountable for how public money is spent. It has to balance budgets and the many demands on the public purse. No category of public servant should be immune to fiscal restraints, and that includes the judiciary.
In its petition, the judges’ association notes that the provincial court is the busiest in the province. Indeed, it is the front line of the judicial system — the vast majority of criminal charges begin in provincial court; it also has jurisdiction over family law and child-protection matters, as well as civil claims up to $25,000.
But how busy the courts are should not be relevant to salary considerations — if the courts are too busy, the answer is more judges, not higher salaries. Unless the pay is so low that it discourages qualified candidates. That currently isn’t the case, noted the compensation commission, although it expressed the concerns about attracting candidates if the gap widens between the salaries of provincial court judges and Supreme Court justices.
The judges are within their rights to appeal the government’s decision and, in fact, did so successfully when the government rejected salary-increase recommendations made in 2010. A B.C. Supreme Court judge directed the government to reconsider, but the government rejected the recommendations again. The judges appealed, and the B.C. Court of Appeal ruled that the judges were entitled to the compensation recommended by the commission.
A dissenting justice in that case said the court was intruding on the government’s responsibility for allocating public funds, noting “that it was unfair and unreasonable to award judges’ salary increases out of the public purse when others paid from it were shouldering the burden of hard times.”
Judges should be fairly paid, and they are — nearly $235,000 a year. Modest increases are not out of line, but should reflect the economic situation.
The government did not ignore the compensation commission’s recommendations, but rather, adjusted them in its budget considerations. The Supreme Court might decide otherwise, but judges, while they should be free of improper influences in fulfilling their duties, should not be impervious to economic reality.
