Evidence of meeting #82 for Justice and Human Rights in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab
Thank you very much.
We are still on the second round of questions.
I now have two members for five minutes. We'll hear Mr. Van Popta and then Mr. Mendicino.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab
Oh yes. I'm sorry.
That's right.
Madame Barron, you have two and a half minutes.
12:10 p.m.
NDP
Lisa Marie Barron NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
My question builds off my colleague's, but with a slightly different lens, perhaps.
You mentioned, given the nomination of Justice Moreau, that the Supreme Court will have for the first time in its 148-year history a majority of women on the bench. Can the minister please comment on the significance of this historic milestone? Can you expand on why it is important that we have this representation?
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON
Ms. Barron, you commented earlier about diversity in our law faculties. It's important for people to see themselves in our institutions and in our professions at our highest levels. I think that's critically important. It's important for young women who are studying around the country and thinking about careers in law. It's important for people who are coming before our courts at every level to understand that when they are in front of an adjudicator in this country, that adjudicator brings legal rigour and their owned lived experiences to their judicial decision-making function.
Given the situation of women and the intolerance and unfortunate issues of equity that continue to plague women in this country, I think it's quite critical that at our apex court, we finally have a majority of women who can bring that lens in, instead of parking their gender and other lived experiences at the door. They can now bring those into their judicial decision-making, and it helps inform that judicial decision-making.
That's what I see in the candidacy of a person like Mary Moreau. I think that's a positive step forward for gender equality in Canada.
12:10 p.m.
Chairperson, Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
I might add that since the nomination was made public, The Guardian in the U.K. has had a report on this and noted that this was a first internationally. I'm not sure how many countries it compared this to, but Canada has a majority of women when compared with other courts internationally.
12:10 p.m.
NDP
Lisa Marie Barron NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
Thank you.
I have another big question, but I'm not going to get into it because I won't have time.
I want to emphasize this milestone to make sure that we're talking through why this is important. We're setting a precedent for how we do things moving forward to make sure that this work continues, regardless of which government is in power, and ensuring that we have that representation.
Do you have any final thoughts on that? I just wanted to highlight the significance and the importance of what's happening today.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON
As a final thought, the great results on the back end are a product of the terrific process on the front end. Safeguarding that process, of which Mr. MacLauchlan is a fundamental part, and the independence of the advisory body and its diversity—geographically and otherwise, in terms of who is on that body—help to produce such excellent results. I think safeguarding the process is also quite critical.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab
Thank you very much.
I will go to the final round. There will be two five-minute segments each, and I will start with Mr. Van Popta.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Tako Van Popta Conservative Langley—Aldergrove, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, witnesses, for being here.
Mr. MacLauchlan, my first question will be for you.
Following up on the questions of my colleague Mr. Housefather about how much work your committee has done on due diligence in determining whether Chief Justice Moreau is the right candidate, we've been given very little notice at this committee. We heard about her appointment late last week. I would have liked to read more of her decisions and more of what she has published. I feel that we have not been given a lot of opportunity to do that.
I wonder if the process is being rushed through for some reason, in a manner that would make it more difficult for us, as parliamentarians, to do our work.
Can you comment on this, please?
12:10 p.m.
Chairperson, Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
I wouldn't use the word “rushed”, but I recognize that a limited amount of time comes with the territory in filling a vacancy on the Supreme Court of Canada. The six nominations under the process that brings us together today were all done in a matter of five or six weeks, roughly, in terms of the work of the advisory board, and roughly another month for candidates to make their applications.
There's a very simple reason for that, which is that there's a vacancy on the Supreme Court of Canada. The court has been operating with effectively eight members since February. That's what really constrains, let me say, the approach or the time that's available.
The other side of that—and I think it's remarkable and to be celebrated—is that people do apply. These applications are a serious piece of work, in this case completed between the 20th of June and the 21st of July. For the interviews, the people on our committee were travelling from remarkable distances all over the country, and it's a great recognition that in our country, Canadians can come together and do an important task with time constraints and do a good job.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Tako Van Popta Conservative Langley—Aldergrove, BC
I'm not criticizing the committee or saying that they didn't do adequate work, although I do have a question about the interview process. I understand that Madam Justice Moreau was before your committee for a one-hour interview. Is that correct? Do you feel that this was adequate time to assess her abilities?
12:15 p.m.
Chairperson, Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
I'll say that it was. There's a lot of prep work prior to being there around the table, in terms of interviews, her application and discussions that we have within our own advisory board, which itself represents a considerable amount of knowledge of the situation.
We were able, in that time, to assess character, expertise and, really, two things: Justice Moreau's ability to, I'll say, hit the ground running—that's another thing about the time frame—as well as her ability to contribute in a collegial environment on a nine-person court, and we were very satisfied with that.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Tako Van Popta Conservative Langley—Aldergrove, BC
That's good, then. I'm happy that the committee was given adequate time to do research ahead of time for the one-hour interview. This committee has not had adequate time to do that work. I'm troubled by that.
I'm wondering what the value is of..... Let me put it this way: I think the one-hour interview we're going to have with her this afternoon would have been so much more beneficial and useful had we been given more time to do our preparatory work.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON
Mr. Van Popta, I appreciate the concern.
I would just say to you that when there's an appointment as significant as a vacancy on the Supreme Court of Canada and when there's been an effective vacancy since February, with Mr. Brown stepping down from his judicial duties, it is incumbent upon all of us to work with expedition.
That's what the IAB has done. That's what's being asked of this committee. I think it's important to keep it as a salient aspect in mind that we're trying to fill a vacancy in the top court of the land, which is hearing pressing matters that will have impacts on Canadians' lives.
Thank you.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
November 2nd, 2023 / 12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Minister, and thank you, Mr. MacLauchlan.
I want to begin by expressing my gratitude to both of you and to your respective teams for putting forward someone who I believe will make an excellent addition to the court. I think that's borne out by her questionnaire and the additional context you have provided this morning.
I want to pick up on something you mentioned, Mr. MacLauchlan, in describing the process of consultation in the lead-up to the responsibilities that you had in assessing candidates and putting Judge Moreau forward. You said that you spoke with Chief Justice Wagner of the Supreme Court, who informed the advisory board of the institutional needs of the Supreme Court.
The thing that struck me was the desire to see someone with trial court experience. I'm wondering if you could expand on that particular skill set. As someone who spent a considerable amount of time before the courts, specifically in the criminal justice system, Judge Moreau's exposure directly to litigants and the process and to the public is experience that I think strengthens her application. Could you expand on that particular institutional need?
12:20 p.m.
Chairperson, Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
Of course, let's start by recalling that everything—except reference cases—that ultimately comes before the Supreme Court of Canada starts out in a trial court. For the group of nine who are there, and others who are currently on the court who have had trial court experience, it's often a matter of seeing through how this all came about or what may have happened to lead to the matter's being in dispute or a concern or, in the case of criminal law, even a charge in the first place. That's where it starts.
In the case of Chief Justice Moreau, she has had, I'll say, dozens of murder trials in her 29 years on the trial court. She's dealt with all of the issues of family law, and so much of that is to know the realities and the burdens that lie behind these matters getting to court. Broadly, it's that exposure to the world that ultimately produces the work of the Supreme Court of Canada, to which Chief Justice Moreau will bring her almost three decades of trial court experience.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Another theme I want to pick up on is the current public sentiment towards democratic institutions, specifically the judiciary. I think both of you have alluded to that in your initial remarks, as well as in answers to questions put to you by my colleagues. How do you think that this process of the independent advisory board is stacking up against some of the headwinds that democratic institutions, specifically the courts, are confronting when it comes to the independent role of the courts?
This is the crucial part of my question: How, if at all, can we improve this process? There have been some questions put to you, but do you have any specific recommendations on how we can further strengthen the process of screening and assessing applicants to the Supreme Court to not only maintain but strengthen public confidence in this institution?
12:20 p.m.
Chairperson, Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
I'm sure that the minister has comments, but if I may comment first, I believe that the public reputation of the Supreme Court of Canada and public confidence in it today are very high. The court itself has, by having public hearings in Winnipeg and then in Quebec City and by engaging with the public in other ways, made that part of its business, and we can see the results. I won't use up all of the committee's time inviting you to compare that with the situation in the United States, but what I would say about this process is that it is as much about transparency as it is about accountability or finding something that wouldn't otherwise be known. What takes place this afternoon is as much for the Canadian public as it is for the pluses or minuses about Justice Moreau's particular nomination, and I think that's a very good thing for the Supreme Court and for the administration of justice.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON
I would add very quickly that I think the best thing to ensure—
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON
—the continued confidence in the administration of justice, Mr. Mendicino, is to continue with a process that keeps producing candidates of such exceptional quality as Madam Moreau. I think that Canadians who watch this afternoon and hear about her expertise and her qualifications can only be reassured. It's incumbent upon all of us to continue that reassurance.
On your first question, what I would also add, Mr. Mendicino, is that with the departure of Michael Moldaver, a criminal expert who was on the court from our jurisdiction of Ontario, we've seen a need to really have a criminal expert of the highest calibre. I think you have that in a person who has conducted over 30-plus jury trials, has dealt with assessments of credibility, has issued jury charges and has a familiarity with how to handle those very sensitive issues. I think that all of the lawyers in this committee room will know that the bulk of the constitutional decisions are not about divisions of powers; they are about sensitive charter rights that apply to sections 7 to 15, and they come out of criminal cases, so that's why that expertise is needed.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab
Thank you very much.
With those wonderful questions that we've had, I note that I have a couple of minutes to speak now because we've concluded the questions and answers. I simply want to say, as the chair of the committee at the moment, that I'm very much privileged and honoured to be here this afternoon and chair the committee.
I'll have you know that in coming here this morning, I got stuck in Montreal. My flight was cancelled. I can tell you that I raced from Montreal to here by taxi, just to get here. It's very exciting to be here today. It's a historic moment for all of us.
I want to thank you, Honourable Wade MacLauchlan, for your leadership on the committee, and you, Minister, for all of the information you're giving us.
I think there's a lot that we are very much looking forward to this afternoon. We look forward to meeting the new Supreme Court of Canada judge. Of course, it's very historic. For the first time ever, we will have more females on the bench. That is something to be celebrated.
I will conclude with my last word, and that is what you said: This is for all Canadians to watch, because it is extremely important.
Thank you very much, everybody. Have a wonderful lunch hour.
As a reminder, we will see everybody at 3:30 this afternoon.
Thank you very much. The meeting is adjourned.
