Skip to content

Anna Gibbon loses bid to appeal recommendation she be removed from office

The Ontario Divisional Court has dismissed an application for judicial review of the recommendation that Justice of the Peace Anna Gibbon be removed from office after she was found to have engaged in judicial misconduct
261593_634951612640164875
Justice of the Peace Anna Gibbon was found to have engaged in judicial misconduct in relation to Highway Traffic Act proceedings involving her son. (File).

THUNDER BAY — A justice of the peace found to have engaged in judicial misconduct has lost an appeal on the review panel’s recommendation she be removed from office.

The Justice of the Peace Review Council Panel ruled in February 2022 that Justice of the Peace Anna Gibbon engaged in judicial misconduct in relation to proceedings involving her son on a Highway Traffic Act charge.

The misconduct included calling the prosecutor to discuss the case and asking the Regional Senior Justice of the Peace to have the charge withdrawn or stayed.

In a disposition decision released in August 2022, Justice Timothy Lipson and community member John Tzanis of the Justices of the Peace Review Council Panel recommended Gibbon be removed from office.

The third member of the panel, Justice of the Peace Holly Charyna, argued in a dissenting decision that Gibbon receive a combined disposition of a warning and reprimand, a 30-day suspension without pay, engaging in mentoring, participation in a healing circle, offering apologies to those affected, and undertaking additional education from a mentor was more appropriate.

Gibbon filed a motion to stay the recommendation in October 2022, which was granted in February 2023 pending the outcome of a judicial review. The matter was heard by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court in April 2023.

In a decision released on Wednesday, the Divisional Court panel dismissed Gibbon’s application for a judicial review of the disposition that included the recommendation she be removed from office.   

“I conclude that both the majority and the minority identified and applied Gladue principles appropriately in the context of this case; there is no error in principle in the decisions below and the majority decision is reasonable,” the Divisional Court decision reads. 

“It is not for this court to re-weigh the evidence, or to assess whether the majority or minority decision is ‘more reasonable.’”

Gibbon’s application for a judicial review was based on arguments that the decision of the majority of the Review Panel was unreasonable, particularly in how it approached Gibbon’s Indigenous heritage.

“The majority failed to reconcile the objective of rehabilitation emphasized in Gladue with the primary goal of restoring public confidence in the administration of justice,” the motion argued. “In particular, the majority failed to weigh the impact on public confidence in the administration of justice of removing an Indigenous female justice of the peace from office in the Northwest Region.”

The motion argued further that the Review Panel focused unreasonably on Gibbon’s remorse and acceptance of responsibility and further that the Review Panel: “unreasonably relied upon its adverse finding of [Gibbon’s] credibility as a basis for concluding that [Gibbon] would not be seen as able to carry out her duties adjudicating matters affecting the public.”

The Divisional Court’s decision stated there was no “demonstrated connection” between Gibbon’s Indigenous heritage and the “long and consistent pattern of misconduct over the course of about a year.”

The decision goes on to say that the majority of the Review Panel found that Gibbon lacked insight into and acceptance of responsibility for her misconduct, resulting in nothing short of removal from office as being appropriate.

“Another way to put this finding is as follows: if, given the uncontested facts and the facts as the Review Council found them to be, [Gibbon] still did not realize that her conduct – in multiple ways over an extended period – was obvious and serious judicial misconduct, then she doesn’t ‘get it,’” the decision reads.  

It was noted by the Division Court that Gibbon’s potential removal from office is a loss for the judiciary and a loss for the city of Thunder Bay and surrounding region.

“It is apparent that the majority were aware of this, and it explains why their conclusion weighed so heavily upon them,” the decision reads.

“But they concluded – as they were entitled to do on the record – that they could not be satisfied that the Applicant would discharge her duties independently, impartially and with integrity in future.  The desirability of retaining an Indigenous jurist could not displace this core finding.”

Gibbon was appointed as justice of the peace for the Ontario Court of Justice in 2013 and previously served as the city of Thunder Bay’s first Aboriginal liaison.



Doug Diaczuk

About the Author: Doug Diaczuk

Doug Diaczuk is a reporter and award-winning author from Thunder Bay. He has a master’s degree in English from Lakehead University
Read more


push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks