Justice committee  There are a number of indicia that even in the proposed amendment really don't make any sense for a private offence, and only make sense for a state-sponsored offence.

Justice committee  If it was a normal situation, I would think most police officers would take the more direct route. But if you had a situation where a Canadian police officer or military person or some other Canadian official actually caused intentional and serious bodily harm and intentional pai

Justice committee  Let me turn that question around. If this offence were to exist, and it's called “inflicting torture”, and there is an existing offence in the Criminal Code called “torture“, which torture are you talking about if a person is prosecuted? If you give the prosecutor one of two off

Justice committee  It would probably exacerbate the concern because the proposed amendment simply removes the word “official”, but all the other elements of section 269.1, at a state torture offence, are reproduced in the proposed amendment. Now one is really confused as to what exactly Canada is t

Justice committee  It depends on the nature of the question. Either Ms. Wright or I will take the lead on the question.

Justice committee  I think Mr. Casey in the second reading speech gave quite a long list of offences that could apply to this type of conduct. The one most applicable would be aggravated assault, which is assault causing maiming, wounding, etc. In terms of legally, there is no gap. The conduct can

Justice committee  Some offences, such as you have mentioned, aggravated sexual assault, in certain circumstances do carry a mandatory minimum penalty. Aggravated sexual assault, aggravated assault, kidnapping would all be offences applicable to the type of conduct that the bill is trying to addres

Justice committee  Thank you. With regard to the role of the ombudsman and the Victims Bill of Rights, when the government was developing the legislation, she was consulted. She had a number of proposals with respect to the legislation. The government considered those, and Parliament considered the

Justice committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Ladies and gentlemen members of this august assembly, let me introduce myself: I am Marc Sauvé, Director of Research and Legislation Services for the Barreau du Québec. For this presentation I am accompanied by Mr. Giuseppe Battista, who is the Pr

Justice committee  No, they don't have to starve themselves to death.

Justice committee  A person can be put into that position by natural causes. It may happen that they can no longer take nourishment because they have had a stroke, for instance.

Justice committee  If a person embarks on a hunger strike or just stops eating for whatever reason, either a medical reason or because they decide to exercise their right to withdraw treatment, they have that right. A person has the right to say, “I do not want any food or liquid from this point on

Justice committee  I think Minister Philpott answered that question by saying that in terms of the provision of medical assistance in the situation of the provision of a medication, the assistance is provided at the time that the medication is provided to the patient. That is the time when the assi

Justice committee  When the legislation is passed, providing medical assistance in dying will become a legal activity. Providing information to a person to engage in a legal activity is legal, so there's no need to basically put in law that it is legal to provide information to tell someone to do s

Justice committee  I'm hiding in the corner.