Law Times

Page 10 September 29, 2014 • Law Times www.lawtimesnews.com FOCUS the ravages of communist regimes and remind Canadians of their core values. It notes the previous government spent approximately $11 million for prelimi- nary plans and designs for a new court building and then decided to cancel the project in 2005. The department requested authoriza- tion from the commission to use the land for the new monument in March 2013. The submission referred to the previous approval for the Federal Court and noted an interdepartmental committee was to consider those plans. The memorial project got the green light in November 2013 on the basis that Confederation Boulevard is a preferred location for commemorations, there's a thematic connection to the Supreme Court in regards to freedom and human rights, and the monument reinforces the symbolic role of the parliamentary and judicial buildings. The approval docu- ment is silent as to the outcome of any analysis regarding the Federal Court option and neither the commission nor Public Works responded to requests for information on that exercise. When asked how he thinks the change came about, Padolsky says: "That's the $100-million question. It is certainly ap- parent that the Tribute to Liberty group wanted a place that was outstandingly important outside of the plan for sites in the core of the capital. During their conversations, they were promised this site. There is no smoking gun document available." Ludwik Klimkowski, chairman of Tribute to Liberty, disputes that there's any controversy about the site apart from the comments of "one Ottawa ar- chitect." "I know that I represent eight million Canadians who have been directly or in- directly affected by communism. I have travelled all over the country, and sup- port for the memorial and the prominent location have been tremendously well re- ceived and endorsed by everyone." When asked how he first learned the site would be available, he replies: "It would be highly inappropriate for me to comment on anything that came from the federal government." The legal community is largely re- maining quiet about the matter. The Ca- nadian Superior Courts Judges Associa- tion, the Courts Administration Service, and the Federal Court declined to make any comment. Paul Harquail, chairman of the federal courts bench and bar liai- son committee of the Canadian Bar As- sociation, notes the CBA's support for a Federal Court housed in one building. "The CBA always talks about efficiency in the administration of justice. Hav- ing all the functions in one place makes sense," he says. He remembers a resolution passed in about 2000 that endorsed the idea of a unified court. "At that time, the Federal Court was housed in four or five separate buildings in the national capital region. It has improved since then," he says. There have been suggestions that the proposed name of the building may have contributed to its demise. Harquail is adamant that despite the respect due to former prime ministers, the deference at issue here is to the court. "No matter what it's named, the site must be appropriate and suitable and deferential to the court," he says. Harquail notes it's the government's role to weigh the benefits of a unified Federal Court against cost consider- ations but has seen no announcements about any fiscal concerns. "The govern- ment has the prerogative to choose what to do with its resources. We always hope that if the Federal Court is built, it will be in a suitable and prominent location. There is no magic in the site itself. This site may be ideal, but there could be other ideal spots in the inventory." In fact, there's no longer any plan for a Federal Court building on the Public Works books. Officials will announce the winning design for the memorial this month. Padolsky expects there will be significant media attention at the time of the announcement. "Will the controversy over the location detract from the intent? That will depend on your orientation to the validity of the memorial. There will be an effect in how people receive the design and what people will think when visiting the site." Baldassarra believes the champions for the building need to be the Federal Court and the Tax Court, but Padolsky says it's not surprising the judiciary and legal advocates are exercising restraint. "We see a tension between the govern- ment as represented by the politicians and the courts. There is a vested interest in avoiding conf lict between the judicia- ry and the government." LT NEW VERSION Peel Back The layers WIth CaSE LOgIStIx® One of the most intuitive document-review tools available, Case Logistix® will help your discovery teams organize, analyze, and produce anything from paper to Electronically Stored Information (ESI). And now you can supercharge your speed and accuracy with a new user interface, advanced search, and analytics. For more information, please visit legalsolutions.com/caselogistix Or call 1-866-609-5811 Plans nixed in favour of monument to victims The planned Federal Court building was to go up next to the Supreme Court of Canada. Continued from page 9

• Cover