Once again, a Canadian prime minister has appointed another chief justice of the B.C. Supreme Court.

In 1996, the prime minister was Jean Chretien and the chief justice was his friend and veteran Vancouver litigator  Bryan Williams, who had no experience as a trial judge at the time of his appointment.

Today, the prime minister is Stephen Harper and the chief justice is Robert Bauman, who formerly sat on the B.C. Court of Appeal. Bauman's appointment takes effect immediately, according to a PMO news release.

From 1982 to 1996, Bauman practised at Bull Housser & Tupper, a 119-year-old Vancouver law firm whose history is inextricably linked with some of the most powerful companies and institutions in B.C.

Bauman was appointed to the B.C. Supreme Court in 1996 and was elevated to the B.C. Court of Appeal in 2008.

In 1999, Bauman made a controversial ruling concerning Eron Mortgage Corporation, which raised $240 million from 4,000 investors before going bankrupt.

At the time, Bauman freed $125,000 from  Eron's remaining funds to pay lawyers representing the president and founder, Brian Slobogian, and his wife Onalee, which upset many investors. Six years later, Slogobian was sentenced to six years in jail in connection with one of the biggest frauds in B.C. history.

In 2005, Bauman was the trial judge  when a  B.C. Supreme Court  jury convicted  Kelly Ellard for the murder of Reena Virk.

That ruling was overturned by the B.C. Court of Appeal based on Bauman’s alleged failure to provide a limiting instruction to the jury regarding a witness’s prior inconsistent statements.

This concerned whether or not the witness saw Ellard and Warren Glowatski walking across a bridge. Bauman permitted the Crown to re-examine the witness, which a B.C. Court of Appeal decision later criticized.

The Supreme Court of Canada later reinstated Ellard’s conviction, ruling there was “no reasonable possibility” that Bauman’s error had any impact on the verdict.

Bauman was also the B.C. Supreme Court  judge who upheld the City of Vancouver’s dismissal of the members of the board of variance while Sam Sullivan was mayor.

In light of these rulings, Harper might think he has appointed a conservative-minded, business-friendly judge. But in 1998, Bauman delivered a ruling that wouldn’t have thrilled Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

In this case, he threw out an impaired-driving conviction because prosecutors didn’t bring the man to trial until 20 months after he was charged.

Bauman's written decision stated that the accused, Dennis Cecil Walker, or his lawyer had appeared at the Campbell River courthouse on five different dates before a trial began on July 3, 1997.

The provincial court judge, Brian Saunderson, dismissed Walker’s application for a stay of proceedings.

Bauman overturned the decision because the Supreme Court of Canada had previously ruled that the “mere length of the delay” is sufficient grounds for drawing an “inference of prejudice” against the accused.

Perhaps the more important issue isn’t whether or not Bauman is soft on drunk drivers or excessively eager to uphold the interests of powerful institutions. It’s the fact that he was appointed by the prime minister and not elected by his peers on the bench of the B.C. Supreme Court.

As chief justice, Bauman  has enormous power. He has sole authority over assigning cases to judges in his court.

Bauman  can grant requests for early trial dates and ask for meetings with other judges. He can decide who will hear applications concerning the validity of search warrants or whether the information to obtain these search warrants should be sealed from public scrutiny.

The chief justice doesn’t have to retire until he or she turns 75.

In a 1995 book called Judicial Conduct and Accountability, Ontario judge T. David Marshall claimed that the biggest threat to the independence of the judiciary in Canada is the chief justices themselves. They deal directly with provincial governments on securing financial resources to administer justice in their courts.

Marshall also criticized the practice of elevating judges from one level of court to another, suggesting that this created an incentive for some to tailor their rulings to enhance the likelihood of a promotion.

Harper likes to talk a lot about accountability, but his insistence on retaining sole authority over the appointment of chief justices of the superior courts demonstrates that his actions don’t always match his words.

Other superior court judges are appointed after being vetted by judicial appointment committees, which include members of the Canadian Bar Association and the Law Society of B.C., as well as appointees from the federal and provincial governments and the judiciary. The Conservatives ensured that at least one member of the "law-enforcement community" would be added to these committes, which rankled some legal experts.

Perhaps if the federal Liberals win the next election, Michael Ignatieff will consider democratizing the judicial-appointment process by permitting the judges of the superior courts  to elect their own chief justice. Another option would be to bring the person before a parliamentary committee to answer questions or to put them through some other sort of public vetting process.

The status quo--the prime minister simply choosing whoever he likes--isn't good enough. Especially when that same prime minister's government has gone to extraordinary lengths in the courts to try to shut down Vancouver's supervised-injection site.