Premier Doug Ford’s Early Retirement Proposal for Judges Sparks Major Outcry Over Judicial Independence

By Devin Breitenberg

Ontario Premier Doug Ford is facing mounting criticism from legal experts, political opponents, and civil liberties organizations after suggesting that the provincial government could offer judges payouts — effectively covering their remaining salaries — to encourage early retirement. The idea, Ford indicated, would allow his government to expedite the appointment of new, "like-minded" judges, aligned with his administration’s tough-on-crime policies.

While Premier Ford defended the concept as a way to "refresh" the judiciary, critics from across the political and legal spectrum have warned that such a move would erode public trust in judicial independence and raise profound constitutional concerns. Speaking during a press conference on broader justice system reforms earlier this year, Ford floated the notion of financially incentivizing judges who were nearing retirement to step down early. "We could offer them their salaries — pay them out for the remaining years — and move forward with new judges who understand that we need to keep violent criminals behind bars," Ford said.

The Premier framed the proposal as a practical way to modernize the courts, speed up case processing times, and ensure that new judicial appointments better reflected public concerns around crime, bail reform, and sentencing practices.

However, Ford’s additional remark — emphasizing the desire for “like-minded” appointees — ignited immediate controversy. Critics argue that framing judicial appointments through a partisan or ideological lens fundamentally undermines the principle of judicial neutrality.

Legal Community Rings Alarm Bells

The response from the legal community has been swift and overwhelmingly negative.  Justice David H. Doherty of the Ontario Court of Appeal, one of the country’s most respected jurists, criticized the Ford government’s approach during his formal retirement ceremony, warning that the very suggestion of aligning judicial appointments with political ideology could cause "irreparable harm" to the justice system.  "Judicial independence is not a luxury; it is essential to the rule of law," Doherty said. "Public confidence cannot survive if judges are seen as political appointees doing the bidding of the government."

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) also issued a strong statement condemning the Premier's comments. Executive Director Noa Mendelsohn Aviv warned that offering financial incentives to influence the composition of the judiciary "sets a deeply dangerous precedent" and "risks turning courts into extensions of the executive branch."

Democracy Watch to Launch Legal Challenge

Democracy Watch, a political accountability group, announced plans to file a constitutional challenge against Ontario’s judicial appointment processes, citing Ford’s comments as evidence of improper political interference.

Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, called the payout proposal "an affront to judicial independence," adding:  "Buying out judges to install political loyalists violates the constitutional requirement for an impartial and independent judiciary under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

Democracy Watch intends to argue that Ford’s approach — combined with previous reforms under the Accelerating Access to Justice Act — fundamentally undermines democratic governance and violates Canadians' rights to fair trials.

Opposition Parties Voice Sharp Criticism

Ontario’s opposition parties also reacted strongly to Ford’s proposal.  NDP Leader Marit Stiles accused the Ford government of "blatantly trying to rig the courts to serve their political agenda."  Interim Liberal Leader John Fraser said the proposal was "unethical, undemocratic, and potentially unconstitutional."  Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner warned that "an independent judiciary is not negotiable in a democracy," and accused Ford of "playing with fire."

Both the NDP and the Liberals have promised to introduce legislation in the next legislative session to protect the independence of judicial appointments, though with Ford’s Progressive Conservative majority, passage of such measures is unlikely without significant public pressure.

Background: Ford's History of Judicial Reforms

Critics note that Ford's comments fit into a broader pattern.  In 2021, through the Accelerating Access to Justice Act, Ford’s government significantly altered the Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee (JAAC) process.  Key changes included:

Increasing the list of judicial candidates the committee must present to the Attorney General from two to six.

Allowing the Attorney General to reject the list in its entirety and demand a new one.

Giving the government expanded power to appoint committee members, rather than relying on arms-length professional organizations. These changes, critics argue, already tilted the balance toward greater executive influence over judicial appointments. Ford’s recent comments, they say, lay bare the true motivations behind those reforms.

Broader Implications for the Justice System

At stake, legal experts warn, is nothing less than the public’s confidence in the fairness of Ontario’s courts.  Judges are expected to apply the law impartially, regardless of political considerations. If the judiciary is perceived as an extension of government — or worse, a partisan body — the integrity of legal decisions could be called into question, especially in politically sensitive cases involving government action.  Veteran legal scholar Professor Lorraine Weinrib from the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law explained:  "If litigants believe that judges are appointed because they reflect government ideology, it fundamentally undermines the idea of equal justice under law."

Public Opinion Divided

Recent polling conducted by Ipsos shows that public opinion on Ford’s justice agenda is split. While a majority (56%) support stricter bail and sentencing reforms, only 29% believe the government should have any influence over who becomes a judge. A large majority — 71% — said they value judicial independence and worry that political interference could lead to miscarriages of justice.

What Happens Next?

Premier Ford has not yet introduced any formal legislation regarding judge buyouts, and his comments appear to be more of a "trial balloon" rather than a confirmed policy. However, observers expect this issue to remain highly contentious in the months ahead.

The Ontario Bar Association is planning an emergency meeting to discuss formal opposition strategies. Meanwhile, civil rights organizations are preparing public awareness campaigns to educate Ontarians on the importance of an independent judiciary.

As calls grow for Ford to retract or clarify his remarks, the controversy underscores a broader tension in Ontario politics between populist governance and long-standing democratic institutions.

Devin Breitenberg is a legal consultant and senior counsel at Devin Law LLC and legal contributor  for Veritas Expositae.  You can reach her at devin.breitenberg@veritasexpositae.com