 |
| Anita Szigeti |
This year the AGM is being held on September 18. I’ve decided to bring a motion forward then, because I want to know what this scandal has cost us, the dues-paying lawyers and paralegals governed by the society. The cost of this fiasco goes well beyond the actual dollars purportedly payable to Diana Miles pursuant to the absurd deal struck between her and the former treasurer. Associated with this shameful incident are the legal opinion, legal services and other advisors’ costs leading up to that one signature on that purported contract. But it doesn’t stop there. In the wake of the revelation of the breach of the society’s own bylaws that required Convocation to approve such an increase, many others have since been retained to investigate, manage and address what happened. This includes the now familiar O’Connor Report, image consultants to mitigate the damage to the law society’s reputation and governance experts to review the bylaws.
Ever since the profession learned what happened, from newspaper articles based on leaked information, treasurer Wardle has persisted in messaging that the law society acknowledges the need for transparency and accountability to ensure it retains — or, more accurately, regains – the public’s trust and ours. In terms of action to back up those lofty goals, however, information was very slow in trickling out. Indeed, getting public disclosure of the O’Connor Report took sustained and forceful advocacy by several lawyer organizations and mounting pressure from licensees. No bencher involved with the process that allowed what happened to occur, including any member of the compensation committee, has faced any consequence as a result of their actions — or inaction — as far as we know. And finally, in June of this year, treasurer Wardle was re-elected by Convocation to serve a second term.
There were three benchers vying for the top job at the law society and a majority of the benchers chose the status quo. They voted to continue under treasurer Wardle’s leadership. Paying attention to the election presented a clear picture of the vision each candidate brought to the table. Treasurer Wardle’s commitment to moving forward from this ugly event, to focus on the work Convocation must do in the ordinary course, does nonetheless include a review and revisions to the society’s bylaws, indicating that the purpose is to prevent a recurrence. Maybe. But the reality is the bylaws were fine. It was a clear breach of the existing clear bylaws that was the problem. People did that. My own view is that this business of bylaw review is a make-work project for the governance consultant and a purposeful distraction for the rest of us, implying that the problem lay with governance structures, rather than those who were governing us.
This is the first half a two-part series.
Anita Szigeti is the principal lawyer at Anita Szigeti Advocates, a boutique Toronto law firm specializing in mental health justice litigation. She is the founder of two national volunteer lawyer associations: the Law and Mental Disorder Association and Women in Canadian Criminal Defence. Find her on LinkedIn, follow her on X and on her blog.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.