There was a time when people could count on certain things in life.

Like Monday coming after Sunday. And the Harper Conservatives railing against judges who delivered legal judgments they disagreed with.

That’s all changed with the “lucky break” former Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer got in Ontario Court earlier this week.

Now the Conservatives believe it’s a provincial matter and that the independence of the judiciary is sacrosanct: “The hon. member is talking about a provincial prosecution in front of a provincial judge within the appeal period and she is asking us to comment. That is completely irresponsible” – Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, Hansard, March 9, 2010

But only a few months ago Minister Nicholson thought something entirely different:

“It's our job, as you know, as parliamentarians to give guidance to the courts. That's why we put maximum sentences. I remember one time somebody said, ‘Why bother having these maximums? We could just let the judge figure it out. The judges are in the best position.’ Well, we have a responsibility. That is why every time we bring in a piece of legislation…we put those maximum sentences in and we give guidance to the courts. That's our job.” (Standing Committee on Justice, December 02, 2009).

The Harper Conservatives have also never been shy about voicing their objections to provincial court decisions: “At this time I would like the record to show that I respectfully disagree with Justice Pitfield.” – Former Health Minister Tony Clement on a BC Superior Court decision to keep open Insite, a Vancouver drug injection facility (Standing Committee on Health, May 29, 2008).

And what about Stephen Harper, who routinely complained about “judicial interference” when he was Opposition Leader?

As recently as last fall he used a closed room pep rally of Conservative supporters in Sault Ste Marie to criticize “left wing ideologues” on the Bench and promise a “continued crackdown on criminals." (Toronto Star, Sept 11, 2009)