Question 6
Provincial Court Justice Selection
"Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to have provincial governments, and not the federal government, select the justices appointed to provincial King's Bench and Appeal courts?"
Why You Should Vote No
Independent courts are the bedrock of the rule of law. Giving the provincial government power to appoint judges who will rule on challenges to provincial government actions is a direct conflict of interest, and a serious threat to judicial independence.
This question requires amending the Constitution Act, 1867. It needs agreement from at least 7 of 10 provinces representing 50% of Canada's population. The federal government is under no legal obligation to act on a provincial referendum result.
Key Numbers
Judicial Independence Is Foundational, Not a Technicality
The function of courts depends on their ability to rule against the government when the law requires it. When a government also appoints the judges who rule on challenges to its own laws and actions, that independence is structurally compromised. Judges need to be insulated from political pressure, not installed by the politicians they may someday need to overrule.
The current federal appointment process for superior courts, governed by Section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867, exists precisely to create that distance. Judges appointed by one level of government are insulated from the political pressures of the other, and that separation underpins the legitimacy of the courts.
Sources
Centre for Constitutional Studies. (2019, July). Judicial independence.
The Canadian Bar Association Opposes This
The Canadian Bar Association, the national voice of Canada's legal profession, has explicitly argued that the non-partisan federal appointment process for superior courts "is fundamental to preserving judicial independence." This is not a fringe view: it is the considered professional position of the lawyers who practice in these courts every day.
The goal of judicial appointments should be excellence and impartiality. A provincial appointment process introduces the risk that judges are selected for their compatibility with the government's policy agenda rather than their legal qualifications.
Sources
Canadian Bar Association Alberta. (n.d.). Statement on judicial appointments to Alberta's superior courts and the Supreme Court of Canada.
JURIST. (2026, February). Alberta to hold referendum on provincial immigration control and constitutional amendments.
It Requires a Constitutional Amendment That Won't Happen
Changing the judicial appointment process for superior courts requires amending the Constitution Act, 1867 under the bilateral or multilateral amending formula. Depending on the scope of the change, this could require agreement from the federal government and at least 7 provinces representing at least 50% of Canada's population.
Getting that level of consensus on a change that other provinces have little incentive to support is extremely difficult. The federal government has no reason to surrender judicial appointment power, and most provinces have not expressed interest in taking on that responsibility. A Yes vote instructs the government to pursue an amendment that is unlikely to succeed.
Sources
Centre for Constitutional Studies. (2019, July). Amending formula.
Red Deer Advocate. (2026, March 30). Alberta calls for changes to superior court appointment process.
This Is About Insulating Government Actions From Legal Review
Consider the context: this referendum is being held by a government that also passed legislation removing courts' ability to review petition questions for constitutionality (Bill 14) and had its actions described by Alberta's Chief Electoral Officer as "an erosion of the separation of powers."
Giving that same government influence over which judges sit on Alberta's superior courts raises a straightforward question: if the government's laws are sound, why does it matter who interprets them? The value of an independent judiciary lies precisely in the fact that its rulings cannot be predicted by who appointed the judge.
Sources
Factsmtr. (2026). Judicial independence in Alberta: Reform or political control?.
Share this page