More Lawyer Whining: Welcome to Canadistan

..that government of the people, by the people,

for the people, shall not perish from the earth? 

Guess not.

Well.

Here's the story:

Guy gets charged with sexual assault on a 6 year old child.

Guy lies to Legal Aid in order to obtain a tax-payer funded lawyer (see my earlier blogs about wiping litigants noses).

Shortly before trial, Legal Aid (miraculously) discovers that Guy lied, and cuts him off.  Tells him he's on his own.

Lawyer seeks to withdraw.

As reported in the Edmonton Journal article:

"The judge ordered her to stay on the case because it was close to trial and he was worried that the accused, if he went ahead and acted as his own lawyer, would try to cross-examine the child victim."

Supreme Court of Canada affirms that decision. 

Justice Rothstein wrote (for a unanimous Court) as follows: 

"What is the role of a court when defence counsel, in a criminal matter, wishes to withdraw because of non-payment of legal fees? Does a court have the authority to require counsel to continue to represent the accused? In my opinion, a court does have this authority, though it must be exercised sparingly, and only when necessary to prevent serious harm to the administration of justice.

(Full text of the Decision is here)

Shorter version:

The Administration of Justice is important, but not important enough for the state to pay for it.  While the Judge's, the clerks, the Prosecutor are all going to be paid for having to partake of this little venture - you dear lawyer, will not. 

Nice.

Welcome to Canadistan.. the Brave New World.