Chief justice says he does not know who donated lifelike bust displayed in Supreme Court

OTTAWA — Chief Justice Richard Wagner, who promised a new era of transparency for the Supreme Court, could not say which private interest donated a lifelike bronze bust of himself that sits prominently in the building’s grand entrance hall. During his annual press conference Tuesday, Wagner also questioned how the gift could raise concerns of conflict of interest. “I don’t know who paid for that, so how can there be a conflict of interest?” Wagner responded to National Post’s questions. Last July, National Post reported that the Supreme Court would not say which private interest had donated a lifelike bronze sculpture of Wagner to the court. The sculptor of the bust said at the time that he usually charges $18,000 for a piece like the chief justice’s. Court watchers and lawyers told National Post at the time that the donation raised concerns of an appearance of conflict of interest and questioned the wisdom of not informing judges and the public of its provenance. There is a longstanding tradition of busts of chief justices appearing in the Grand Entrance Hall, but Wagner’s sculpture differs from his predecessors’ in two key ways. First, his bust is the only one that has no indication either on the inscription or the court’s website of who donated it to the court. Second, his sculpture is the first to be displayed publicly before his departure from the court. During the press conference, Wagner repeated a previous statement from the court that the bust’s donor requested to remain anonymous and added that he did not know who had paid for it. But he did not explain why the court has not disclosed any information at all about the donor behind his sculpture, unlike those of his predecessor. “I was told that there was a tradition at the Supreme Court that the bust of all the chief justices is made. And I was told that… it is paid by a foundation or individual which wants to remain anonymous. That’s what I was told,” he said. “I have no more explanation. That’s all I can tell you.” The suggestion that Wagner — who posed for pictures for the sculptor and has been photographed next to the bust — has no idea who paid for the sculpture is also raising eyebrows across the legal and judiciary community. The chief justice’s ignorance of the provenance of the bust also raises risks that it was donated by a potentially embarrassing source that should have no ties to the court. Wagner said sometimes judges receive “nominal gifts” from organizations or individuals, such as “quite a few pens,” medals or ties such as from the Supreme Court of South Africa. He noted that they are recorded on a sheet that he offered to send to reporters. “We don’t have gifts, it’s more like tokens of appreciation that we receive,” he said. Wagner also did not justify why the court was in the habit of accepting anonymous donations of busts of chief justices.  Ministers, their staff and hundreds of high-ranking public servants, for example, must disclose almost all gifts valued at over $200 and their provenance to the ethics commissioner’s public registry. Since his appointment as chief justice in 2018, Wagner has made increasing the transparency of the court a key tenant of his mandate. During his press conference, he listed many of the measures he’d put in place, such as increased disclosure from the Canadian Judicial Council which he also heads. “I’m strong partisan of transparency, and since I became chief, I made sure to be as transparent as possible within the limits of the law as governed by the law,” he said. Before Wagner, the SCC did not have an issue with disclosing at least the nature of the donor of every preceding chief justice’s bust. For example, former chief justice Bora Laskin’s bust was  “presented by the Canadian Bar Association and the Canadian Society for the Weizmann Institute of Science. “ The bust of Wagner’s predecessor, Beverley McLachlin, was “presented by members of the Bar.” The sculpture of former chief justice John Robert Cartwright was “presented by his family.” Court watchers and lawyers also previously questioned why Wagner’s bust was already on display before his retirement. On Tuesday, Wagner acknowledged that the court had broken with tradition but argued that it was at the sculptor’s request. “Usually the bust is displayed after the chief justice leaves the premises and the post. In this situation, I was I was told that the artist requested the registrar to expose or to display the bust because a third party has to get a copy. That’s the explanation I got,” Wagner said. In July, the sculptor Jean-Pierre Busque told National Post that he did not know why the piece was already on display but confirmed that he had made a replica for the Quebec law firm where Wagner worked before his appointment to the bench in 2004. “I have no idea why the bust was put out immediately as opposed to after retirement. They asked me for a bust … I delivered the bust to Ottawa, and they installed it,” he said last year. “People who visit the court are curious to know who the chief justice is. So, I think it’s normal that it be displayed.” National Post cnardi@postmedia.com

• Raises, retention bonuses promised for Canadian Forces personnel
• Canada joins U.K., Australia, Norway, New Zealand in sanctioning two Israeli ministers

Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.