It has been more than two years since Justice John Gomery released his final report in the sponsorship inquiry.

The scandal served as an effective platform to launch the Conservatives into power with a mandate to make government more accountable.

But today lawyers were still arguing about whether Judge Gomery was biased and his decisions tainted.

Specifically, five lawyers and their assistants gathered in federal court in an application for judicial review.

On one side, there were two-dozen boxes of documents surrounding lawyers representing the Gomery Commission and the government. These lawyers were equipped with special carts with wheels to help them tow their heavy briefcases.

On the other side of the court, the appellants were surrounded by binders with pull-tabs. They had so many binders their tables were full and they required a special wheeling tray to accommodate more binders. If they had stacked their binders one on top of the other, these binders would surely have surpassed the tallest lawyer.

The first to speak on behalf of his client, former Prime Minister Jean Chretien, was David Scott.

Scott argued that Judge Gomery shouldn’t have held a press conference outside of the inquiry and that he shouldn’t have made utterances such as calling Jean Chretien “small town cheap” and that Chuck Guité was “a charming scamp.” Guité was the federal bureaucrat at the centre of the scandal who was eventually convicted criminally.

The basis of Scott’s case is that a judge wouldn’t make those kinds of comments and that judges are appointed as heads of inquiries because they are independent, impartial and confer public respect and confidence in the office. So heads of inquiries should conduct themselves appropriately, because they can damage the reputation of people such as Jean Chretien.

The arguments continue in the morning.

Jean Chretien is joined in this court action by his former chief of staff Jean Pelletier, and a former minister, Alfonso Gagliano. They are all arguing that there is an apprehension of bias at the foundation of Justice John Gomery, which affected his findings.

So the sponsorship inquiry lives on.