Evidence of meeting #74 for Justice and Human Rights in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was accused.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:35 p.m.
Senior Counsel and Litigation Coordinator, Official Languages Law Section, Department of Justice
The impact would clearly be on the provincial legislator.
If Monsieur Caron is successful in his legal challenge, then you're absolutely right. We would be faced with a situation similar to the one we faced following the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Mercure in 1988, and all of Alberta's laws would be declared invalid. The Supreme Court, in 1998, provided the province with a timeframe and invoked rule of law to keep the laws that were in force and to allow for their translation.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
What if there would be retroactivity applied to that decision, and the whole of Alberta's law since 1905 would be invalid? That would be quite the conundrum.
4:35 p.m.
Senior Counsel and Litigation Coordinator, Official Languages Law Section, Department of Justice
One thing I want to point out is that Monsieur Caron's trial was not a trial under the Criminal Code provisions. So we weren't under—
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
4:35 p.m.
Senior Counsel and Litigation Coordinator, Official Languages Law Section, Department of Justice
Exactly. It was a traffic ticket.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
That is five minutes now. Thank you very much.
Just so committee knows, the Wednesday meeting will be a subcommittee on agenda, in the same timeframe it normally is. It's not a full committee, it will be a subcommittee.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
Why a subcommittee, Mr. Chair?
This is wonderful news, Mr. Chair.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
That's what's happening.
Mr. Mai, you have a couple of minutes, and then we have to adjourn.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Ms. Soublière, you mentioned the Beaulac case heard by the Supreme Court. It established certain criteria. Could you tell us about them and tell us whether they have been applied properly since then?
4:35 p.m.
Senior Counsel and Litigation Coordinator, Official Languages Law Section, Department of Justice
The ruling in the Beaulac case was specifically on section 530(4) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Beaulac had not made his application within the timeframe set out by the Criminal Code. The judge was required to determine whether the best interests of justice would be served by ordering that a trial be held for Mr. Beaulac in French. All of Mr. Beaulac's applications were dismissed, in large part because the court deemed his English skills to be quite good.
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that an accused's knowledge of the other official language was completely irrelevant because sections 530 and 530.1 of the Criminal Code are not aimed at the principles of fundamental justice, but rather at language rights, which have a very different purpose and origin. They are two different things. One deals with language rights while the other deals with the principles of fundamental justice.
You are therefore correct. The Supreme Court established criteria that apply when the application is not made in a timely manner. In particular, the court stated that an accused's ability to speak the other official language and administrative inconveniences are irrelevant. In other words, the availability of a judge or court stenographers should not be considered.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC
My question is for Mr. Francoeur and Mr. Doyle.
In practice, do the provinces really meet these criteria?
4:40 p.m.
Senior Counsel and Litigation Coordinator, Official Languages Law Section, Department of Justice
Robert can add to what I will say, but I believe that since the Supreme Court's ruling in the Beaulac case, the provinces and territories have taken the measures required to meet the needs of applications for trials in the minority language.
4:40 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Public Prosecution Service of Canada, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Department of Justice
I have nothing to add.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC
You will recall that there was a huge controversy surrounding the appointment of a unilingual justice to the Supreme Court.
You said that, in practice, there is no problem with justices being bilingual and being able to hear cases in one language or the other. You do not believe that we are missing justices who can hear cases in both languages.
4:40 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Public Prosecution Service of Canada, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Department of Justice
No. In fact, available judges are underemployed. The same goes for prosecution services and crown attorneys.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC
And these judges are competent enough to be appointed justices at the Supreme Court.
4:40 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Public Prosecution Service of Canada, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Department of Justice
Yes. The Canadian Association of Provincial Court Judges and the National Judicial Institute provide training. In addition, provincial selection committees and the federal judicial selection committee must respect very specific and rigorous criteria. When a position of judge is announced, it is announced as being either bilingual or not. If so, candidates must meet very rigorous and specific criteria.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
Thank you very much. Thank you to our guests for coming back again.
We will be doing this study likely further in the fall, so you may get called back again.
I'm going to adjourn the meeting. We won't be coming back after the votes, because by the time votes are done there will be less than 15 minutes left.
With that, we'll adjourn for today. Thank you very much.
