The House is on summer break, scheduled to return Sept. 15

Military Justice System Modernization Act

An Act to amend the National Defence Act and other Acts

This bill is from the 44th Parliament, 1st session, which ended in January 2025.

Sponsor

Bill Blair  Liberal

Status

Second reading (House), as of Sept. 19, 2024
(This bill did not become law.)

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.

This enactment amends provisions of the National Defence Act that relate to the military justice system in response to the Report of the Third Independent Review Authority to the Minister of National Defence and the Report of the Independent External Comprehensive Review of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces.
In response to those reports, the enactment amends that Act to, among other things,
(a) modify the process for appointing the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal, the Director of Military Prosecutions and the Director of Defence Counsel Services with a view to enhancing their independence;
(b) affirm the Judge Advocate General’s respect for the independence of authorities in the military justice system in the exercise of the Judge Advocate General’s superintendence of the administration of military justice;
(c) remove the court martial’s jurisdiction to try a person in relation to an offence under the Criminal Code that is alleged to have been committed in Canada and that is of a sexual nature or committed for a sexual purpose;
(d) remove the Canadian Armed Forces’ authority to investigate an offence under the Criminal Code that is alleged to have been committed in Canada and that is of a sexual nature or committed for a sexual purpose;
(e) expand the class of persons who are eligible to be appointed as a military judge;
(f) expand the class of persons who may make an interference complaint and provide that a member of the military police or person performing policing duties or functions under the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal’s supervision must make such a complaint in certain circumstances; and
(g) change the title of the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal to the Provost Marshal General.
In addition, the enactment amends the National Defence Act to remove military judges from the summary hearing system and to provide that, in the context of a service offence, an individual acting on behalf of a victim may request that a victim’s liaison officer be appointed to assist them.
It further amends that Act to harmonize the sex offender information and publication ban provisions with the amendments made to the Criminal Code in An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Sex Offender Information Registration Act and the International Transfer of Offenders Act .
Finally, it amends the Criminal Code to, among other things, provide superior courts of criminal jurisdiction with the jurisdiction to hear applications for an exemption in respect of orders to comply with the Sex Offender Information Registration Act made under the National Defence Act and applications to vary the duration of such orders.

Elsewhere

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

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-66s:

C-66 (2017) Law Expungement of Historically Unjust Convictions Act
C-66 (2015) Law Appropriation Act No. 2, 2015-16
C-66 (2005) Law Energy Costs Assistance Measures Act

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-66 aims to modernize the military justice system and address sexual misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces by amending the National Defence Act and other acts. Key changes include giving exclusive jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual offences committed in Canada to civilian authorities, modifying the appointment process for key military justice authorities to remove chain of command influence, and expanding eligibility for military judges and interference complaints to the Military Police Complaints Commission. The bill intends to build trust and confidence in the military justice system and support culture change within the Canadian Armed Forces.

Liberal

  • Modernizing military justice: Bill C-66 aims to modernize the military justice system to rebuild trust. The bill proposes amendments to the National Defence Act to bolster confidence in the military justice system.
  • Implementing Arbour's recommendations: The bill addresses Justice Arbour's recommendations, specifically recommendation 5, by removing Canadian Armed Forces jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual offences committed in Canada, giving exclusive jurisdiction to the civilian justice system.
  • Addressing Fish's recommendations: Bill C-66 addresses recommendations from Justice Fish, modifying the process for key military justice authorities to remove command influence, expanding eligibility criteria for military judges, and expanding the class of persons who can make an interference complaint to the Military Police Complaints Commission.
  • Supporting culture change: The bill supports creating a safer and more inclusive work environment and changing the culture within the Canadian Armed Forces so that every member of the defence team can be authentic and feel valued.

Conservative

  • Supports the bill: The Conservative party supports Bill C-66 and wants to get it to committee for vigorous study. They want to hear from witnesses, experts, academics, victims and other stakeholders, including the legal community, provincial governments and municipal courts.
  • Liberals are untrustworthy: The Conservatives do not trust the Liberals to implement the policies needed to stop sexual assault and sexual misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces. They cite the Liberal's soft-on-crime policies as the reason for their distrust.
  • Civilian court capacity: The Conservatives have outstanding issues on whether there is capacity within the civilian court system to handle what is coming from the Canadian Armed Forces. They believe the courts are already overrun because of the soft-on-crime approach that is allowing people to get out on bail.
  • Political interference: The Conservatives are concerned that the bill would increase political interference. They say it would give the Minister of National Defence control over more individuals within the Canadian Armed Forces and the power to issue guidelines with respect to prosecutions.
  • CAF is in disrepair: The Conservatives believe that the Liberal government has failed the Canadian Armed Forces. They say the warships are rusting out, the fighter jets are worn out, the army has been hollowed out, and they are short of soldiers, sailors and air crew.

NDP

  • Supports moving to committee: The NDP supports bringing the bill to committee quickly. However, the member is clear that this legislation alone is insufficient and cannot be the final step in addressing the issue.
  • Need for survivor consultation: The member emphasizes the importance of consulting survivors in the legislative process, noting that many survivors feel they were not consulted on this legislation and feel invisible. She argues that survivors should not be treated as a communications problem or legal liability but should be centered in the discussion.
  • Beyond criminal justice reform: The member stresses that the issue extends beyond criminal justice and requires addressing the permissive environment and culture that enables sexual misconduct. She calls for a top-down review of the CAF, from recruitment and training to healthcare and promotions.
  • Addressing systemic issues: The member raises concerns that the legislation might perpetuate the "rotten-apple theory" and not address the wider institutional and cultural drivers of sexual misconduct. She advocates for more options for survivors to seek justice, including human rights court cases, non-criminal cases, and restorative justice.

Bloc

  • Supports the bill's principle: The Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-66 in principle at the second reading to send it to committee, but expresses concerns regarding the timing of the bill's introduction and the potential delay of other important matters before the Standing Committee on National Defence.
  • Long overdue reforms: The bill addresses sexual misconduct by removing the Canadian Armed Forces' jurisdiction over the investigation and prosecution of sexual offences listed in the Criminal Code when committed in Canada. This change was a key recommendation from Justice Arbour's report and is considered long overdue.
  • Civilian appointments: The bill modifies the appointment process for key judicial and military authorities, such as the Canadian Forces provost marshal, the director of military prosecutions, and the director of defence counsel services, making it a political, civilian process to ensure independence from the military chain of command.
  • Potential improvements needed: The exclusion of military judges from summary hearings, where unit commanders preside over disciplinary matters, may require improvement, as it could lead to unfair justice for subordinates.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:40 p.m.

Scarborough Southwest Ontario

Liberal

Bill Blair LiberalMinister of National Defence

Madam Speaker, I would just like to inquire. There were a couple of important votes here in the House just recently, in the last six or seven months, where we were voting on money for the Canadian Armed Forces. We were voting on money, for example, to support its Operation Unifier, the work it was doing in support of Ukraine. We voted on money for its raise.

The member opposite, who just proclaimed her support for the Canadian Armed Forces, actually voted against those supports. Over the past eight years, we have more than doubled the defence budget, and every single time those votes came up, the member opposite, while she has been a member of the House, voted against them. I just wonder how she reconciles her statement of support with her actions. I would remind her that deeds speak.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB

Madam Speaker, the numbers speak for themselves: $1.2 billion in defence spending alone. The minister is trying to stand up to defend helping Russia export oil and natural resources, relative to Ukraine, to help stand against our allies. The turbine is what I am talking about.

The government is making efforts not to help our ally Israel, not sending equipment that would actually help our allies. It does not matter, because it has reduced spending, which shows disrepute to our allies. As well, the actions consistently go against what they are saying. He can say whatever—

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:40 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

Questions and comments. The hon. member for Nunavut has the floor.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:40 p.m.

NDP

Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU

Uqaqtittiji, I thank the member for her passion. This is an important piece of legislation that requires such seriousness, especially thinking about the survivors. We have heard that survivors say that the bill was not thought through well enough, especially for survivors. I wonder whether the member could tell us whether the Conservatives would agree at committee to extend the study so we could make sure that more survivors' voices will be heard at committee.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB

Madam Speaker, I believe the NDP member when she says that the survivors feel that the bill was not thought through well enough, because nothing that has been done by the government has been thought through well enough, or it has been thought through well enough with the bad intention of covering up, which is what we saw in the status of women committee.

I stand with the NDP member in her concern for the survivors, and I hope the government will take them seriously and start to take actions that show not only that their intentions are better but also that they are making true efforts to stand behind what they are saying.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:40 p.m.

Bloc

Sylvie Bérubé Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I am wondering something about this bill, since neither the Liberals nor the Conservatives took action in the Vance case. What is the Conservatives' vision for this bill and the improvements that need to be made?

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. Right now, the Canadian Armed Forces are in bad shape, but I think that our leader and our party will make them a priority. We will give our armed forces the funding necessary to do their job. Respecting our friends around the world will create a better armed forces from which all Canadians will benefit.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:45 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Kelowna—Lake Country, carbon pricing; the hon. member for Spadina—Fort York, foreign affairs; and the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni, indigenous affairs.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:45 p.m.

Cambridge Ontario

Liberal

Bryan May LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Small Business and to the Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario

Madam Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has made it clear that he is committed to ensuring that the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are workplaces where all members, military and civilian, feel supported, respected and included. While much has been accomplished toward this goal, there is still more to do.

Bill C-66 is another critical step toward lasting institutional reform, as well as toward strengthening trust and confidence in the military justice system. It is the next step in the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces' efforts to implement recommendations from the independent external comprehensive review and the third independent review of the National Defence Act.

Apart from the recommendations addressed in Bill C-66, the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have also made progress on recommendations from the minister's advisory panel on systemic racism and discrimination report and the national apology advisory committee report.

Overall, these four reviews have helped define how DND and CAF are undertaking changes to the military justice system and culture change. That is why today I would like to provide the House with an overview of these independent external reviews and the progress the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have made to implement their recommendations to date.

I will begin with the independent external comprehensive review, also known as the IECR. This review was launched in April 2021 and led by former Supreme Court justice Louise Arbour to examine harassment and sexual misconduct in National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, as well as policies, procedures, programs, practices and culture, including the military justice system.

I apologize; I should have mentioned at the outset that I need to split my time with the hon. member for Hamilton Mountain.

The final report was made public on May 30, 2022, and the minister at the time welcomed all 48 recommendations. When the final report was received, there were 17 recommendations for which implementation could actually be undertaken immediately. These included, but were not limited to, the implementation of recommendation 48, appointing an external monitor to oversee the implementation efforts of the IECR's recommendations.

The minister at the time appointed Madame Jocelyne Therrien as the external monitor, who provides monthly progress reports to the minister on the implementation of the IECR's recommendation. She also provides biannual progress reports that are made available publicly.

The minister also announced the implementation of recommendations 7 and 9, changes to the military grievance and harassment process, in August 2023. With the implementation of these recommendations, any CAF member who has experienced sexual harassment can now choose to direct their complaint directly to the Canadian Human Rights Commission without first exhausting the internal grievance and harassment process.

More recently, in June 2024, the minister announced that in response to recommendations 1 and 2, the CAF had issued interim policy guidance to abolish the definition of sexual misconduct for its policies and to include sexual assault as the stand-alone definition, referring to the Criminal Code as the applicable law.

In response to these recommendations, the term “sexual misconduct” has been replaced with three new terms: “conduct deficiencies of a sexual nature”, “harassment of a sexual nature” and “crimes of a sexual nature”. Sexual assault is also included as a distinct definition in relevant policies. These changes will provide better coherence and clarity, reduce confusion and better capture the range of inappropriate conduct.

The minister also announced the repeal of the duty to report regulations in response to recommendation 11. Madame Arbour found that these regulations, while well intended, took away the agency and control of survivors in the reporting process, potentially leading to the revictimization of those they were meant to protect.

The repeal of the duty to report came into effect on June 30, 2024. As we see with Bill C-66, the department is seeking to remove the CAF's investigative and prosecutorial jurisdiction over the Criminal Code sexual offences committed in Canada, which would address a part of recommendation 5 of the IECR. Since December 2021, all new Criminal Code sexual offence charges are now being laid at the civilian justice system and no new sexual offence charges are being adjudicated in the military justice system. Bill C-66 would also address recommendations from the third independent review of the National Defence Act.

In November 2020, the hon. Justice Fish was appointed to conduct an independent review of specified provisions of the National Defence Act and their operation. In June 2021, the minister tabled the report before Parliament. Justice Fish provided the minister with 107 wide-ranging recommendations that support the ongoing modernization of the military justice system, military policing, military police oversight and the grievance process. This is the most comprehensive independent review and far-reaching examination of the military justice system since the reviews led by former chief justice of Canada Brian Dickson in the late 1990s.

Bill C-66 would address eight recommendations from the review. The amendments would seek to, among other things, modify the process for the appointment of the Canadian Forces provost marshal, the director of military prosecutions and the director of defence counsel services. They would also expand the class of persons who are eligible to be appointed as a military judge to include non-commissioned members, and change the title of the Canadian Forces provost marshal to the provost marshal general, to align with the titles of other senior designations in the CAF. The amendments would seek to strengthen trust in the military justice authorities operating independently from the chain of command and to bolster the trust and confidence of Canadians in the military justice system.

DND and CAF are also building on previous external and internal reports and recommendations focused on racism and discrimination. The minister's advisory panel on systemic racism and discrimination was created to identify ways of eliminating racism, prejudice, discrimination and gender bias within the military. Through the report, DND and the CAF have established the director of anti-racism implementation, formerly the anti-racism secretariat, under chief professional conduct and culture to inform and focus our institutional efforts to address racism and discrimination. We are also collaborating with other government departments in the development of Canada's anti-racism strategy and expanding the availability of anti-racism resources.

There are many intersections between this report and the national apology advisory committee report, which included eight recommendations for the Government of Canada. These included an apology for the treatment of the No. 2 Construction Battalion, the largest all-Black military unit in Canada's history. The government made this historic apology in July 2022.

The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces maintain an unwavering commitment to implementing the recommendations of former Supreme Court justices Arbour and Fish, as well as the recommendations from the minister's advisory panel on systemic racism and discrimination and the national apology advisory committee. The legislative changes proposed in Bill C-66 would play a critical role in helping us implement some of the recommendations from former justices Arbour and Fish and help rebuild trust in the military justice system.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:55 p.m.

Bloc

Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Madam Speaker, I see that this bill proposes transferring matters involving military tribunals to common law court judges. I agree in principle. I think it is an excellent idea, and it will solve a lot of problems.

However, it will also add to the workload of the common law courts. Take the Superior Court, for example, which is already overwhelmed. Then there are the vacancies that I have repeatedly asked the Minister of Justice to fill through appointments, and more positions need to be created. There is a need for judges, just across the bridge from here in Gatineau. Just last week, people were telling me how badly new positions need to be created, to bring in new judges. Meanwhile, they are increasing the workload of the judiciary.

I was wondering if my colleague could give us some good news on this issue. Is his colleague, the Minister of Justice, able to confirm that positions will be created soon, that candidates will be appointed to the judiciary in the days or weeks to come, so that we can undertake this new, but important task?

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON

Madam Speaker, I agree that we absolutely need to make sure that we are working very closely with the provinces on this issue. We want to make sure that this transition is smooth. I will say this has been the case for some time now. No cases of sexual misconduct are being adjudicated within the military justice system. All of those cases are being tried in the civil courts.

I will say that ensuring that we are working with the provinces on this is critical. We have heard a number of comments this evening criticizing our government with respect to delays that are provincial in focus. We have to encourage the provinces to make sure they are investing effectively, so there are no backlogs within their court systems.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-66, An Act to amend the National Defence Act and other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his history of what has gone on. We heard testimony earlier today about how, when survivors of sexual assault had their cases transferred from the military justice system to the civil justice system, many of the cases were thrown out because they took too long. Why did the government not recognize that, because it had not appointed enough justices, rapists were already going free? Why did it not take earlier action to put more judges in place so the survivors could have sought justice?

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 5 p.m.

Cambridge Ontario

Liberal

Bryan May LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Small Business and to the Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario

Madam Speaker, I am not going to speak to specific cases, because I do not have all that information in front of me. However, I will say once again that we have to work closely with the provinces. We have to encourage the provinces to make sure they are investing effectively.

This recommendation to move recommendation 5 from the Arbour report was a pillar recommendation. This was not a soft recommendation. This absolutely needs to be done, and we have moved in that direction. We know that this is what the stakeholders were asking us to do. We know that there are going to be challenges as we move forward with respect to resourcing and making sure that the provinces are properly equipped to manage. However, again, this is a provincial-level issue and a provincial-level question.

Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders

September 19th, 2024 / 5 p.m.

NDP

Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his intervention in the House. I also sit with him on the veterans affairs committee, and he was part of the significant study we did on women veterans. What was horrible about that study was watching woman after woman come in and talk about things that had happened to them and, by the way, whether they were also a victim and now a survivor of sexual interference.

One thing that is very clear to me in any marginalized group is that there is nothing about us without us. That is a common thing we hear all the time. I want the bill passed very quickly because I want to protect these women. I want to have their voices heard. However, of course, my concern is that, if they are not a key part of the consultation process, then that would not be reflected.

Could this member talk about whether this is going to happen and whether the minister will be held to account to make sure it does?