Bill C-3 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code

This enactment amends the Judges Act to restrict eligibility for judicial appointment to persons who undertake to participate in continuing education on matters related to sexual assault law and social context. It also amends the Judges Act to provide that the Canadian Judicial Council should report on seminars offered for the continuing education of judges on matters related to sexual assault law and social context. Finally, it amends the Criminal Code to require that judges provide reasons for decisions in sexual assault proceedings.

Judges Act

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)]

Madam Speaker, the member always has very erudite speeches. Like the member, I am very passionate in my support of this bill. I will probably not ask a question, but let him carry on because I know he always has a lot of very important input. However, I want to make a couple of comments.

One was mentioned earlier this afternoon. Over and above the bill, which is very important, Bill C-51 added some very important steps. I want to ensure that all the elements of Bill C-51 are implemented so we can get the full benefit of the bill to deal with this.

The second point I want to make is that I am very strongly in support of indigenous involvement in designing the training. Indigenous women and girls, who are often the targets and victims, come from a different culture and a different history of their own unique legal systems. They are different social structures of which we just cannot understand—

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

I will have to leave it there to permit some other interventions.

The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Yukon for his kind words.

He mentioned Bill C-51, which was an omnibus justice bill from the last Parliament. If I recall rightly, it contained many different elements about many different issues. To the member's point, sometimes when we have these kinds of omnibus bills, there are particular elements of it that get relatively less discussion.

What the member is pointing out with respect to indigenous communities is something I was talking about in a slightly different context. I was talking a bit about our engagement internationally and the link we sometimes see between violence against women and violence against minority communities and that women from minority communities are sometimes particularly targeted. The member is speaking about something in a similar context in Canada. That is an important complement to some of the points I was making more broadly, that we need to understand human rights and the dignity of the person in an integrated way.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking my hon. colleague for his speech.

It is always a pleasure to listen to him. He tends to build solid arguments and is glad to share ideas. I would even say I found the first part of his speech rather dazzling, but perhaps more because of its delivery than its substance.

We are here to exchange ideas. Most members of the House agree with this bill, and we will be supporting it. However, it is important to remember that there has been some criticism, particularly from the Quebec bar, which believes that this bill jeopardizes the independence of the judicial system. I would like to hear my hon. colleague's point of view on that, and I will put on my sunglasses to listen to him.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his remarks.

The member is asking about the issue of judicial independence and how that interacts with this bill. The mechanisms that would be put in place with this bill would respect judicial independence. They involve a person committing to undertake training, but they preserve a level of autonomy in pursuing that training. The decision they make is ultimately still up to them, the things they say, how they make those determinations and so forth. They have to commit to the training, but in practice there does not seem to be a way of compelling them to do it.

In some respects that is a limitation, but it may well be a necessary limitation in that it preserves the independence of judges to act independent of the legislature even though we are going as far as we can within the balance of judicial independence to very strongly recommend the value of this particular training.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague made some references to the per cent of reporting in Canada and also some of the incidents that happened overseas in different countries and victims who were in minority groups.

I often hear of the need for protecting women or to provide them a safe place. I can completely relate and understand that, and it is necessary. However, would the member also think it is necessary to perhaps do a better job at educating our men, ensuring they are not committing these types of offences against women? We know nine out of 10 incidences involving sexual assault are female victims. We are also not doing so well in the country when we look at the statistics. We have a very low conviction rate.

Does the member think our system is also one that is broken? Perhaps we do not have as strong of a judicial system as we may think compared to other countries.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this bill is about providing training to judges in Canada. It is one that I strongly support because I think it is absolutely necessary. I completely agree as well with the member's comment that education as well as character formation for men is critically important. Most of the victims of sexual violence are women. Most of the perpetrators, statistically, are men. Absolutely, that is important and complementary to the point I made.

With respect to the international context, as we seek to make reforms in our system, we can see the need to strengthen the effectiveness of justice systems as being an important part of our international development assistance as well. Just as I do not think we should wait until poverty is fully solved at home before addressing poverty overseas, I do not think we should wait until this problem is fully solved at home before we engage overseas.

We also need to recognize the issue of online sexual exploitation means, unfortunately, in these crimes there may be links. There may be victims overseas who are being victimized by perpetrators in Canada. It speaks to the need for an international perspective and for that collaboration.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the recognition in the House this evening. Bill C-3 is a vital bill to speak to. I want to thank my hon. colleague for his remarks and his speech. I echo his remarks about celebrating Rona Ambrose and her being such a vital aspect to this proposed legislation.

I know that each and every member of this House is responsible for certain training. As a matter of fact, just this upcoming Monday I will be taking the House of Commons harassment training, so training is vital. It does not matter if one is a member of Parliament, or what profession one comes through, it is absolutely vital.

The previous speaker, the hon. member from the Liberal party, said that this legislation cannot come too soon. My hon. member, with as much passion, said it is time to speak out. How detrimental was shutting down the government to allowing people to speak out?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the point that my colleague is making. The prorogation of Parliament was a mistake. We can identify many vital areas of work that were either halted or put on hold as a result of that, including the important study being done at the Canada-China committee on Hong Kong, the work on this bill and other legislative items. There were certain aspects of the fiscal response to COVID-19 that were also delayed as a result of prorogation.

Across the board, on all of these issues, we have had a situation where the government prorogued Parliament, which caused a big delay, and then we came back and it said that we needed to rush.

I think it was very clearly a mistake. It was a mistake that was aimed at addressing political controversy around the WE scandal, as opposed to the public interest.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, it is great to be here today, back in our nation's capital again for another sitting week.

I rise today in support of Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code. This bill is a key step to ensuring that each individual who interacts with our justice system is treated with the dignity, respect and compassion they deserve. I am eager to see this important bill continue to move through the legislative process.

Bill C-3 would amend the Judges Act to ensure that all newly appointed provincial superior court judges take part in training on social context and sexual assault law. This bill would also propose that when the Canadian Judicial Council develops seminars on sexual assault law, it does so following consultations with groups that the council considers appropriate, such as sexual assault survivors and organizations supporting them.

Bill C-3 also seeks to have the council report to the Minister of Justice on the seminars offered related to sexual assault law and social context. Finally, this bill would require judges to provide reasons for decisions under certain sexual assault provisions of the Criminal Code.

I am proud to note that Bill C-3 continues to be an example of parliamentary collaboration on key issues that have an impact on Canadians. The bill before us today is identical to Bill C-5, which was referred to committee before Parliament was prorogued.

Like Bill C-5, Bill C-3 reflects the private member's bill introduced by the former interim leader of the Conservative Party, the Hon. Rona Ambrose. I want to thank her for her work and her commitment to these important issues. I look forward to continuing our collaboration to ensure that this bill is brought before the other place and that Canadians can benefit from the important changes it seeks to make.

This evening I would like to focus my remarks on the importance of social context training for judges. In particular, I would like to address how the social context education provisions in Bill C-3 would help ensure an inclusive justice system that is free from systemic racism and system discrimination.

Each individual who appears in court is more than a claimant, respondent or witness. They are not just a name on a legal document or a face in a courtroom. An individual's engagement with the justice system is deeply intertwined with their life outside of court. They bring with them to court their experiences, their stories and their context. To ensure that all people who engage with the justice system are treated respectfully, fairly and equally, judges need to understand the realities of these individuals who appear before them. Bill C-3 recognizes this need.

By requiring candidates to superior court benches to participate in continuing education on social context, Bill C-3 would help ensure that new judges are aware of the many factors that can affect a person's involvement in the justice system.

Bill C-3 would amend the Judges Act to restrict eligibility for judicial appointment to a provincial superior court to persons who undertake to participate in continuing education on matters related to social context after their appointment. This means that every new provincial superior court judge would begin their tenure on the bench with this important training.

Social context refers to a range of factors that impact an individual's reality and experiences, including experiences leading up with their interaction with the justice system, their first contact with the justice system and their experiences before a judge. The factors that make up social context intersect an individual's life. Social context includes systemic racism and systemic discrimination.

Bill C-3 reflects this reality. During the clause-by-clause study of this bill, the member for Hull—Aylmer proposed an amendment to specify that systemic racism and systemic discrimination are part of social context. I was pleased to support this critical amendment and see it pass at committee.

For too many Canadians, notably indigenous peoples, and Black and racialized Canadians, systemic racism and systemic discrimination are lived realities. We see this in health care, access to economic opportunity and our justice system. We know that indigenous, Black and racialized Canadians are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. We also know that Canadians who experience systemic racism and systemic discrimination face structural barriers to access to justice, barriers that have sadly been worsened by the pandemic.

Amending Bill C-3 to specify that social context includes systemic racism and systemic discrimination reflects where we are as a nation, where we are as a country. We have work to do.

Our government is committed to doing that work. We released Canada's anti-racism strategy for 2019 through 2022. We are investing in economic empowerment for racialized communities. We are combatting online hate, and we are creating a unified approach to better collect disaggregated data. Through these and other actions, we are taking concrete steps to combat systemic racism and systemic discrimination in their many incarnations, including in the justice system. Bill C-3 will help us achieve this critical goal.

Bill C-3 focuses on the importance of providing training for judges that addresses racism and systemic discrimination. When appointed, judges should be aware of the reality lived and experienced by the people who will come before them. The requirement for social context education set out in Bill C-3 would ensure that new judges have this awareness.

Learning about social context will ensure that newly appointed judges are aware of systemic racism, systemic discrimination and the ways these pervasive problems impact individuals' experiences with the justice system. When judges have this fundamental awareness, courtrooms are more sensitized, hospitable and inclusive. A judge who is aware of social context is, for example, better prepared to ensure that a racialized young woman with a disability appearing in court experiences a justice system that is respectful and responsive to her reality. Social context training supports understanding, empathy and appropriate judgments for all Canadians.

By bolstering judges' awareness of the context in which they fulfill their functions, social context training ensures myths and stereotypes or personal societal biases do not play a role in their decisions. Social context shapes the experiences of all individuals who interact with the justice system, whether they are before a judge, in superior court, or in provincial or territorial court. That is why our government is also working with our partners to improve the availability of training on social context for provincially and territorially appointed judges.

We must ensure that our justice system treats everyone with respect and dignity. The team work involved requires the collaboration of all parties and potential stakeholders in the justice system.

Together, we must work to ensure that Canadians have access to a justice system that is responsive, inclusive and free from systemic racism and systemic discrimination. This bill is an important step toward these goals, and I am eager to continue to work with my colleagues to move Bill C-3 forward.

[Louise Charbonneau, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent speech.

The Bloc Québécois believes that passing this bill serves the interest of Canadians. As the member stated, this is about trust, awareness, emotions and social context. Bill C-3 touches on our beliefs, our values and our emotions. Victims, just like judges, have their own value systems, which vary greatly from one person to the next.

Does my colleague believe that the training given to judges will truly have an impact on the decisions they will have to make in sexual assault cases?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my answer, quite simply, is that, yes, this will have a positive impact on our justice system. It will have a positive impact, once the law is put in place and implemented, for judges to be more sensitized to the needs of Canadians who face systemic discrimination and racism. Bill C-3 would also reaffirm the principle judicial independence for our legal community and judges, and rightly so.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

Of course it is necessary to train judges to ensure they have increased knowledge and awareness when dealing with cases of sexual assault. That is something that the Bloc Québécois supports.

However, there is another skill that is important when becoming a judge in the highest court in this country, and that is language skills. Right now, there is no legal obligation for judges to be bilingual.

I want to give some background. In 2006, Stephen Harper's Conservative government appointed a unilingual anglophone judge to the Supreme Court of Canada, which caused quite an uproar. Many francophones in Canada, particularly in Quebec, were appalled by this insulting decision. Then, in 2010, Commissioner of Official Languages Graham Fraser stated that bilingualism should be an essential criteria for becoming a judge, particularly in the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, in 2011, Stephen Harper's Conservative government appointed another unilingual anglophone judge.

Today, the Minister of Official Languages, the member for Ahuntsic-Cartierville, very strongly suggested that French was declining in Quebec and Canada.

Does my colleague believe that Supreme Court judges should be officially required to be bilingual?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, bilingualism is a very important factor for me and my family, but I would generally state that Bill C-3 would improve the confidence in our justice system for all Canadians, especially sexual assault survivors, and that is the intent of the bill.

I also wish to thank the hon. member who brought forward the original incarnation of the bill, the Hon. Rona Ambrose.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the member could provide his thoughts on how encouraging it is to see all political entities in the House of Commons get behind the legislation, which will ultimately see it passed.