Bill C-9 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Judges Act

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

Sponsor

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now 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 the Judges Act to replace the process through which the conduct of federally appointed judges is reviewed by the Canadian Judicial Council. It establishes a new process for reviewing allegations of misconduct that are not serious enough to warrant a judge’s removal from office and makes changes to the process by which recommendations regarding removal from office can be made to the Minister of Justice. As with the provisions it replaces, this new process also applies to persons, other than judges, who are appointed under an Act of Parliament to hold office during good behaviour.

Similar bills

S-3 (44th Parliament, 1st session) An Act to amend the Judges Act

S-5 (43rd Parliament, 2nd session) An Act to amend the Judges Act

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-9s:

C-9 (2020) Law An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy and Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy)

C-9 (2020) An Act to amend the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act

C-9 (2016) Law Appropriation Act No. 1, 2016-17

C-9 (2013) Law First Nations Elections Act

Votes

Oct. 31, 2022 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Judges Act

Oct. 26, 2022 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Judges Act

Debate Summary

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-9 seeks to amend the Judges Act by establishing a new process for reviewing misconduct allegations against federally appointed judges, with a focus on those not serious enough for removal from office. The bill aims to streamline procedures, improve transparency, ensure financial accountability and introduce alternative sanctions beyond removal, such as counseling and reprimands. The legislation intends to modernize the judicial conduct process while maintaining judicial independence and public confidence in the justice system.

Liberal

Modernize judicial conduct process: The Liberals support modernizing the judicial conduct process to maintain public confidence in the justice system. The reforms aim to streamline the process, enhance fairness, and ensure that allegations of judicial misconduct are addressed effectively and efficiently.
Streamline and improve efficiency: The bill seeks to streamline the judicial conduct process by replacing judicial review with an internal appeal mechanism. This includes establishing review and hearing panels, and empowering the CJC to impose alternative remedies that are proportionate to the conduct at issue.
Enhanced accountability and transparency: The bill aims to introduce a stable funding mechanism with guidelines and regular audits for the CJC's role in investigating judicial conduct. It will require that the CJC include in its annual public report the number of complaints received and how they were resolved, and codifies a place for public representatives in the review of complaint processes.
Fairness and judicial independence: The reforms are designed to honor commitments to fairness, independence, and procedural rigor while improving the process. Judicial independence is safeguarded by allowing the judiciary to regulate the conduct of its own members, while also including procedural fairness to judges whose conduct has been called into question.

Conservative

Supports strengthening judicial complaints: Conservatives agree that strengthening and increasing confidence in the judicial system by updating the Judges Act to better respond to complaints is a positive step.
Soft-on-crime approach criticized: The party criticizes the government's policies, including Bill C-5, for potentially weakening the justice system and reducing protections for victims by removing mandatory minimum sentences for various crimes.
Mandatory minimums defended: Conservatives believe that removing mandatory minimum penalties undermines victims' rights and the public's confidence in the justice system, arguing that there should be a minimum punishment for certain crimes.
Erosion of trust in institutions: The Conservative party is concerned about the decline in public trust in Canadian institutions, including the justice system, and attributes this to the government's approach, including tacit support for movements like 'Defund the Police'. Some argue that there is a need to restore public confidence by ensuring proper accountability and integrity in the justice system.
Desire for increased accountability: The Conservatives believe that all individuals, including judges, need to be held accountable for their actions. Bill C-9 is an important starting piece, they say, but there is still much more that needs to be done.

NDP

Supports modernization of process: The NDP supports modernizing the process for complaints against federally appointed judges, including alternative remedial options beyond removal from the bench. They view this as a necessary step to increase public confidence in federal judges, particularly given that the process has not been updated in 50 years.
Concern about priorities: The NDP questions the Liberal government's priorities, suggesting that issues like decriminalizing drugs and addressing systemic racism in the justice system are more urgent than reforming the judicial conduct process. While they support the bill, they feel the government's focus may be misplaced.
Need for judicial understanding: NDP members emphasize the need for judges to understand the findings of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Canada's obligations to address the equity and rights of Indigenous peoples. They highlight the St. Anne's residential school case as an example of a miscarriage of justice, questioning the judiciary's understanding of these obligations.
Justice system failures: The NDP argues for a higher standard of justice, particularly in cases involving Indigenous survivors of abuse. They point to the St. Anne's case, where government suppression of evidence and a lack of procedural fairness for survivors led to a denial of justice.

Bloc

Supports Bill C-9: The Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-9 as it addresses key issues within the judicial misconduct review process and meets their expectations. They believe it will benefit stakeholders and improve public confidence in the judicial system.
Addresses process deficiencies: The bill addresses the length of the review process, lack of intermediate sanctions, and the cumbersome process within the Canadian Judicial Council. The bill streamlines the process and ensures judges found at fault do not receive salaries during the appeal period.
Need for judicial appointments reform: The Bloc emphasized the need to address partisan politics in judicial appointments and suggests a review process involving a committee with representatives from recognized parties, the public, and professional bodies.

Green

Supports Bill C-9: Elizabeth May supports Bill C-9, which reforms the Canadian Judicial Council, because the existing process, in place since 1971, needs fixing to address issues such as lengthy appeal processes and taxpayer-funded legal fees for judges facing misconduct allegations.
Limits judicial reviews: Bill C-9 limits the ways a judge can appeal, ensuring they cannot exploit every possible appeal and charge the taxpayer for legal fees and restricts access to judicial review through the federal courts, with the Supreme Court of Canada being the final avenue of appeal.
Balances rights: The bill balances the rights of judges facing complaints, ensuring fair treatment and preventing frivolous complaints from disaffected litigants, while also protecting public confidence by ensuring judges meet ethical standards.
Offers alternative actions: The new system allows for actions such as training, counseling, or warnings for judges, rather than a binary choice of removal from or remaining on the bench, which allows for a fairer treatment of judges facing stress or mental health issues that may affect their conduct.

Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:40 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

I have to interrupt the member. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is rising on a point of order.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:40 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I think the member might be referencing the private member's bill. Maybe we can just vote on this, and then we can get to that.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:40 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

Are there any other members who wish to speak to Bill C-9?

Is the House ready for the question?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:40 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

The question is on the motion.

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or wishes to request a recorded division, I would ask them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

The hon. member for Grande Prairie—Mackenzie.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB

Mr. Speaker, we would request a recorded division.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:45 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, the division stands deferred until Monday, October 31, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:45 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House, you might find unanimous consent to call it 1:30 p.m. at this time, so that we could begin private members' hour.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:45 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker Chris d'Entremont

Is it agreed?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 28th, 2022 / 12:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The House resumed from October 28 consideration of the motion that Bill C‑9, An Act to amend the Judges Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 31st, 2022 / 3:10 p.m.

The Speaker Anthony Rota

It being 3:10 p.m., pursuant to an order made on Thursday, June 23, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage of Bill C‑9.

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #206

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 31st, 2022 / 3:25 p.m.

The Speaker Anthony Rota

I declare the motion carried.

Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

Judges ActGovernment Orders

October 31st, 2022 / 3:25 p.m.

The Speaker Anthony Rota

I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded division, Government Orders will be extended by 12 minutes.