Justice committee  It's not entirely clear. I believe the CJC is exempt from access to information and privacy laws, so I'm not.... Unfortunately, I don't have that answer right in front of me. Generally speaking, I think the council is very conscious of confidentiality and has always attempted to protect it whenever possible.

Justice committee  It seems to codify a very basic right to simply receive reasons for a particular decision, specifically the decision to dismiss complaints by the reviewing member. It's hard to see how that would hinder the ability of the policy to evolve. There will still need to be a policy that addresses the notice of complainants, probably in other ways.

Justice committee  What this amendment seems to do is codify the existing procedural fairness obligation of the council to provide the complainant with notice of the decision, and the reasons for the decision. That's already a right complainants have. The thinking behind proposed section 87 under clause 12, which requires the CJC to set up a policy on how to notify complainants about the outcomes of decisions, is this: The CJC would establish the policy, then the policy would come under review by the federal courts whenever a complainant applies for judicial review of the council.

Justice committee  Sure. I'm happy to comment on it. I think the term “substantially similar to discrimination” is a bit vague. It doesn't really have a clear legal meaning, so it's discrimination or it's not. For something that is “substantially similar” to it but is not discrimination, exactly what that means and how it could constitute misconduct would seem a bit unclear.

Justice committee  I think the clause already reads, “that alleges sexual harassment or discrimination on a prohibited ground within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act”. I think that would revert the provision to the original wording.

Justice committee  Yes, if that term were dropped, then so long as we retain discrimination on a ground as set out in the Canadian Human Rights Act, that would be fine. That provides a clear legal standard that screening officers can assess complaints against.

Justice committee  We asked the Federation of Law Societies of Canada to forward our consultation document to all bar associations across the country. We expected the submissions from the federation would reflect those of all bar associations in Canada. However, we received a separate submission from the Barreau du Québec.

Justice committee  No. We went through the federation. We expected the federation to consult the various bar associations, including the Barreau du Québec.

Justice committee  There's not really any difference. They're exactly the same bill.

Justice committee  No, those bills were identical to Bill C‑9.

Justice committee  All the applicable case law was studied, and we feel that Bill C‑9 reflects it. That's unfortunately all I can say on the subject.

Justice committee  No, there aren't 1,200 complaints; there are 1,200 federally appointed judges. Having more judges probably means that the number of complaints grows a little bit every year. It's around the 600 mark or so every year. How many are frivolous, vexatious or go forward, that information, unfortunately, we don't have.

Justice committee  Yes. It will be part of what will come out in the reports every year going forward.

Justice committee  Yes, absolutely. The objective will be achieved. It's true that there are a lot of committees. I have to say that this process does two things simultaneously. It's designed, first, to determine whether a judge is guilty of misconduct or should be sanctioned for slightly less series misconduct, and, second, to determine whether it should be recommended that the judge be removed under subsection 99(1) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

Justice committee  Bill C‑9 is absolutely consistent with that paragraph of the charter. Paragraph 11(d) requires that judges have a right to a hearing where they may be heard or be represented by counsel, if they so wish, and where they may adduce evidence and have it considered. Review panels are specifically designed for that purpose.