An Act to amend the Criminal Code to address the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Jordan

Sponsor

Denis Trudel  Bloc

Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)

Status

Second reading (House), as of June 14, 2024

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-392.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to codify the analytical framework the Supreme Court of Canada set out in its decision in R. v. Jordan regarding the right of an accused awaiting trial before a superior or provincial court to be tried within a reasonable time, and to provide for exceptions to this framework.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

The Criminal CodeCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

May 30th, 2024 / 10 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

moved for leave to introduce BillC‑392, an act to amend the Criminal Code to address the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Jordan.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to table this bill today. It closes a loophole in our justice systems, ensuring that the principle of access to justice is followed for violent and serious crimes. It will also help restore public trust in the justice system.

The Bloc Québécois's bill seeks to provide a framework for the use of the Jordan decision by amending the Criminal Code so that the decision cannot be invoked for primary designated offences under section 487.04 of the Criminal Code. These offences are serious crimes that include sexual assault, murder, aggravated assault, kidnapping and torture.

In Quebec alone, 148 stays of proceedings on the ground of unreasonable delay have been granted by judges at the request of the defence since 2021. Our bill will serve as a guardrail against the government's slow pace in appointing judges, which lengthens court delays.

There are currently 57 judicial vacancies in Canada. If the government were to appoint judges as requested by all chief justices of the various courts, we would not need to use this bill.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)