The updates make recommendations on social media platforms, connections, and burner accounts
The Canadian Judicial Council has released updated guidelines for federal judges using social media, outlining advice on the content they post, how they identify themselves on social media platforms, burner accounts, whom they connect with, and what platforms they post on.
Announced Tuesday, the guidelines are a substantial expansion of the recommendations provided in the most recent edition of the Ethical Principles for Judges, the CJC’s framework for ideal judicial conduct, which briefly warns judges to be mindful of how the public will perceive their social media conduct.
The CJC told Canadian Lawyer that a social media subcommittee at the CJC spent the past year drafting the guidelines with the help of academic expertise and the Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association. The CJC approved the guidelines at its September plenary meeting.
“The purpose of the guidelines is to provide additional guidance about the safe and appropriate use of social media by judges,” the CJC said in a statement on Tuesday.
While there are benefits to using social media, the CJC continued, “The guidelines also recognize that improper use of social media can undermine public confidence in the judiciary as well as the principles that define the judicial role, namely: independence, integrity, respect, diligence, competence, equality, and impartiality.”
The new recommendations warn judges to consider the social media platforms they choose to post on, making sure they understand each platform's security and privacy features and consider “whether the platform itself conveys values or raises concerns that are clearly inconsistent with the principles that define the judicial role.”
The guidelines said that upon being appointed to the bench, judges should review their social media activity and determine whether it could undermine confidence in their work as judges or in the overall judiciary. New judges should also review or even “unfriend” certain contacts, considering how those connections might impact public confidence in the impartiality of the courts.
The CJC said that while it neither recommends nor bans the use of burner accounts, judges should be aware that pseudonyms will not necessarily prevent third parties from identifying them as the owner of a certain account. The CJC also warned that “taking steps to shield one’s identity does not justify or excuse otherwise improper social media behaviour.”
Judges can explicitly identify their judicial role if they’re on a social media site where professionals typically name their occupations. However, they cannot leverage their status to seek benefits or promote or criticize businesses on consumer review websites.
The CJC also advised against judges expressing their personal opinions on social media – either publicly or via private messages – about disputes or matters that are before them.
The guidelines said, however, that social media could offer opportunities for judges “to engage in education activities for the benefit of the judiciary, the legal community or the public in general, consistent with the judge’s ethical obligations.”
Social media also could help judges connect with their colleagues, maintain personal connections with friends and family, and “have the collateral benefit of educating judges on a technology that may arise in cases before them.”
