Moncton, N.B. — In a ruling that has Canadians boiling over with rage, a federally appointed New Brunswick judge has handed a Nigerian national a sweetheart “get-out-of-jail-free” deal explicitly so he won’t be kicked out of the country — even after he was convicted of deliberately breaching a no-contact order with his ex-partner in a domestic violence case.
Justice Mario J. Lanteigne, elevated to the Court of King’s Bench just months earlier by Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government, slashed the original 12-month probation sentence to a conditional discharge on appeal. Why? To spare 33-year-old Adebowale Adekoya the “collateral” consequence of deportation to Nigeria under federal immigration law. In his March 26, 2026 decision, Lanteigne openly weighed the man’s desire to remain in Canada — where he has lived since his 20s with no strong ties left back home — as the decisive factor, concluding it served the offender’s “best interest” and wasn’t “contrary to the public interest.”
Adekoya had already spent 158 days in pre-trial custody. The underlying assault charge against his former partner was dismissed, but he was convicted of breaching the court-ordered no-contact condition just days later. Critics say the judge didn’t just bend the rules — he snapped them in half to prioritize an immigrant’s stay over accountability for ignoring a domestic violence protection order.
This isn’t an isolated outrage. It’s Exhibit A in a growing national scandal: a politicized judiciary stocked with Trudeau appointees who treat immigration consequences as a get-out-of-jail card for non-citizens, while Canadian victims and citizens get the book thrown at them. Federal judicial appointments under the Liberals have long been slammed as ideological pipelines, rewarding lawyers aligned with progressive priorities on crime, borders, and “social justice.” Lanteigne — a former sole practitioner and Workers’ Compensation Tribunal vice-chair called to the bar in 2009 — is one of the latest.
The decision has ignited fury across social media and comment sections, with ordinary Canadians calling it textbook “two-tier justice.” Why should a foreign national get a lighter sentence than a citizen would for the same crime, just to avoid facing the music back home? Public trust in the courts is already in the toilet — and this pours gasoline on the fire.
Enter Bianca Kratt, K.C., the Calgary-based president of the Canadian Bar Association and a card-carrying member of Alberta’s legal establishment. On April 2, 2026 — just days after stories like this one blew up — Kratt issued a remarkable public warning to the media: Stop “delegitimizing judges” or you’ll undermine public confidence in the entire justice system. In a statement dripping with condescension, she slammed “recent media commentary” criticizing judges (without naming names or cases) as “crude effort[s] at undermining public confidence in the judiciary.” Judges, she lectured, apply the law impartially regardless of their backgrounds, and the press has no business pointing out patterns that look suspiciously like activist leniency.
The timing couldn’t be more tone-deaf — or revealing. While everyday Canadians watch Trudeau-appointed judges contort sentencing to keep criminal non-citizens here, the head of Canada’s biggest lawyers’ lobby demands the media pipe down and stop “delegitimizing” the very institution that’s eroding its own legitimacy through decisions like Lanteigne’s.
Alberta lawyer Collin May, former chief of the Alberta Human Rights Commission, fired back in the National Post, calling the CBA’s move a “disgraceful” attack on press freedom. He’s right. In a free society, the public has every right — and duty — to scrutinize judges, especially when they appear to be playing politics with public safety. Telling journalists to back off isn’t defending the rule of law; it’s shielding a cozy legal cartel from accountability.
This case isn’t about one judge or one offender. It’s about a justice system that increasingly feels rigged: soft on crime when it suits progressive ideology, obsessed with avoiding “harsh” outcomes like deportation, and now actively trying to muzzle the media when the public dares to notice. Canadians have had enough. If the bench and the bar want to restore trust, they should start by delivering equal justice — not special deals for those who aren’t even citizens. And they can start by dropping the lectures about “delegitimizing” criticism. The real threat to the judiciary isn’t tough questions from the press. It’s rulings like this one.
