Bill C-11

Military Justice System Modernization Act

An Act to amend the National Defence Act and other Acts

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 and provide for exceptions;
(d) [ Deleted ]
(d.1) provide for the development of a plan for the establishment of an office of the inspectorgeneral for sexual misconduct in the Canadian Forces;
(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 or an accused 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.

Military Justice System Modernization Act

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague well enough to know that he loves asking this type of rhetorical question. The answer is often in the question. He is gesturing at me, denying it. At least he is smiling. I think he knows that I am close to the mark and that the shoe fits.

I would say that it is indeed a real scandal. That being said, I do appreciate the nuance he mentioned about the difference between an allegation and a charge and between an assertion and a demonstration. Obviously, due diligence is always required.

In fact, Quebec has already taken steps in this direction. This idea was already advocated by Véronique Hivon, who proposed creating specialized courts. It was felt that the system itself was not adequate.

I digress. Let us come back to the military cases. I am not overly confident in the Liberal government, but it is presenting us with a bill that, at this stage, I believe deserves our close attention. There are enough interesting elements in it that respond to a report that was not produced by the government itself.

Of course, if we see that it needs to be improved, we will exert pressure to ensure that it is. If there are still cover-ups, as my colleague says, we will do our job as the opposition, of course, to exert the necessary pressure to ensure that this does not happen.

However, at this stage, there are enough interesting elements for us to want to take a closer look at the bill.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton for his excellent speech and for raising the level of debate on such an important bill. Obviously, this culture of military silence has had very serious consequences for a great many victims.

Speaking of silence, Minister Sajjan's silence spoke volumes. Going forward, this bill gives the minister greater responsibilities.

What happens if we still have a minister who refuses to act? Can we trust a minister with that much power in the current context? Should we suggest amendments in this regard in committee?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is a fairly fundamental issue. Honestly, we will be watching this closely. That is why an in-depth study is so important. As a number of people have already pointed out, the government's previous version of the bill, which died on the Order Paper, did not properly address the problem. We will do an in-depth study.

That said, I agree with the government's reason for wanting to increase this power, which is simply because it should be removed from the oversight of simple military command. There is a good reason for that.

Is that the answer? We will have the opportunity to take a closer look at this, to shed light on it and to examine it closely very soon.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my Bloc Québécois colleague for his excellent speech. I greatly appreciated his overview of the bill.

I think we all agree that we want to ensure that victims will have access to justice. We also want to ensure that victims will have access to the services and resources they need when they file a complaint because we acknowledge what a difficult and traumatizing process that can be. In addition, we want to ensure that we continue to maintain a trauma-informed approach.

I also understand that the member and the Bloc Québécois will be supporting Bill C‑11, but he said he would reserve judgment.

Can my Bloc Québécois colleague tell us what changes he would like to make to Bill C‑11 to improve it?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have only one reservation, which is that we are not going to blindly trust anyone or any bill that is voluminous by nature, that has legal implications and for which the devil is in the details, as with any document of this nature. That is why I am simply saying that we need to do our job properly. When the government presents us with a bill, we, as an opposition party, cannot simply support it outright and accept it at face value. This is what I am referring to when I say we are going to study it carefully.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is signalling that the Bloc Québécois is going to support the bill.

An important part of the bill is that trials for sexual assault and sexual harassment would be taken out of the military courts and brought into the civilian courts, but given the delays in our civilian courts, is the member confident that victims of sexual assault and of sexual harassment will see justice in a speedier and more fair way in civilian courts?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the civilian court problem is very real, as our colleague mentioned. Obviously, the bill does not directly address that issue. The issue remains to be addressed. I think it would be better to ask the Minister of Justice about that matter.

That said, it is definitely a consideration. I understand that sending these cases to the civilian court system could result in longer processing times for certain files, but for now, longer processing times are better than the risk of improper handling. It is probably the lesser of two evils. Then, the issue of processing times needs to be addressed immediately, and I completely agree that this is a critical issue.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I must say that my colleague clearly explained the events that took place. Earlier, I tried to explain what happened with both parties here, and I hope this bill will not die on the Order Paper. Why? Every week, I meet with people who say that they have been the victims of alleged sexual misconduct, harassment and so on.

For veterans who are watching at home right now, does my colleague agree that we need to invest not only in legislation but also in services for victims?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree with my colleague. Impunity must be replaced with accountability. The bill puts forward a plan to do just that. The bill broadens access to what I believe are called victim's liaison officers to include individuals acting on behalf of victims. In other words, it is not just alleged victims who will have access to this service; their representatives will too. Expanding access is a good idea. It is not the main thrust or the most substantial element of the bill, but it is still very important. These are good things that are worthy of mention, and so I completely agree with my colleague on that.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as we saw, the Conservatives turned a blind eye by appointing Mr. Vance chief of the defence staff even though rumours of sexual misconduct were already circulating. The Liberals did even worse. I will come back to my colleague's suggestion. Should we not find ways to ensure that the process is not completely controlled by those with political power?

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the reason for transferring power to politicians is precisely to get it out of the military's hands. This should help avoid situations like the one where Mr. Vance said he controlled the judicial process. Now, we will have to look very closely at whether it is better to—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Resuming debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Bay of Quinte.

It is with great pride that I rise today at the second reading of Bill C‑11, which proposes a fundamental reform of the military justice system. This issue is particularly close to my heart. I have two sons and a daughter-in-law who serve in the Canadian Armed Forces. I am extremely proud of them, as I am of all CAF members and the sacrifices they have made for our country.

I am a proud military mom. One of the reasons I entered public service was to ensure that members of the Canadian Armed Forces and their families receive the care and support they deserve for the sacrifices they have made. That is exactly why Bill C-11 matters so much.

Those who protect us deserve to be protected in return. Victims of harassment and sexual assault in the military must be able to report abuse without fear of reprisal.

With this bill, we want to ensure that victims can pursue their perpetrators in civilian court, free from the pressure of the chain of command. We must strengthen the system to help survivors heal from their trauma, provide them with options that respect their dignity and allow them to make decisions without fearing for their future in uniform.

Bill C-11 is grounded in two landmark independent reviews, one by former Supreme Court justice Morris Fish and the other by former Supreme Court justice Louise Arbour.

Justice Fish's independent external comprehensive review, published in 2021, examined how our military justice system functions, from investigation and courts martial to oversight and accountability. He found that while the military justice system is vital to maintaining discipline and operational effectiveness, it must also align with the core principles of Canadian justice: independence, fairness and respect for the rule of law.

Justice Fish made 107 recommendations, several of which are aimed at strengthening civilian oversight, transferring the handling of sexual offences to civilian courts and increasing accountability within the chain of command. Bill C‑11 directly addresses these recommendations by modernizing the system and bringing the military process more in line with the civilian process.

A year later, Justice Louise Arbour was asked to go even deeper, to look not just at policies but at the culture and power structures that shape behaviour inside the Canadian Armed Forces and the Department of National Defence. In the preface to her report, she wrote words that should stop us all:

For years, women were simply shut out.

When finally allowed to serve, women were made to feel they did not belong.... They were harassed, humiliated, abused and assaulted, and, appallingly, many continue to be targeted today....

Indeed, the exposure of sexual misconduct in the CAF has caused as much damage as defeat in combat would have to demoralize the troops and shock Canadians.

Those words are a call to action. Justice Arbour's report contains 48 recommendations for rebuilding trust and accountability. Recommendation 5 is key: the exclusive prosecution by civilian authorities of all Criminal Code sexual offences alleged by members of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Bill C‑11 implements that recommendation. Serious offences, including sexual offences, will now be handled by the civilian justice system, offering the survivors the same protections as all Canadians.

Our government has already acted on an interim basis to implement this recommendation. Since late 2021, all new allegations of Criminal Code sexual offences involving CAF members have been referred to civilian police and prosecutors. Bill C-11 now makes that practice permanent, providing clarity, consistency and confidence to survivors and to the system as a whole.

General Jennie Carignan, when she was the chief professional conduct and culture, met with over 16,000 members of the defence team and the Canadian Armed Forces. Those 16,000 voices have told us again and again that change must be real, structural and lasting.

Members of the armed forces must have confidence in their justice system. Survivors should not fear telling their story or forfeiting their military career.

As our government emphasized in “Our North, Strong and Free”, harassment, discrimination and violence in any form have no place in the Canadian Armed Forces. Such behaviour causes lasting harm and undermines Canadians' trust in their military institutions.

That is why it is imperative to act now. I applaud the fact that the other parties in the House expressed their support for Bill C‑66 in the last Parliament in a spirit of non-partisan collaboration.

Justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done.

Bill C-11 will strengthen the independence of military judges, enhance oversight of military police and ensure that serious offences, including sexual offences, will now be dealt with by the civilian justice system. It will improve transparency and accountability, which will help restore public trust and encourage more Canadians to serve in a fair and reliable system.

Our government is also taking concrete action. We have established the sexual misconduct support and resource centre, fully independent from the chain of command. We have introduced a digital grievance form to lower barriers for reporting. We have repealed the duty to report, restoring choice and agency to survivors. We have also launched the Canadian Military Colleges Review Board to strengthen accountability in our institutions.

These measures show that we are not merely talking about intention, but also about implementation. They will enable future generations to serve in a safer, more inclusive and more respectful environment.

Bill C-11 is not just aspirational. It would enshrine these changes in law, embedding independence, fairness and protection for survivors into the very structure of the National Defence Act.

It is the right thing to do for our military personnel, and it is the right thing to do for our country, but this is just a start.

As a proud mother of serving members, I hope my own family and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces will never need to rely on these protections, but for those who have suffered in silence, who have lost faith in the system and who fear coming forward, we see them, we hear them and we are committed to getting this right. They have our backs, and we must have theirs.

I urge all members of this House to support Bill C-11. Let us get it to committee for thorough study and demonstrate that supporting members of the Canadian Armed Forces is truly non-partisan. We need to do this. We need to get it right for them.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I volunteered at the Cambridge Legion for several years, and I am always proud to support our veterans and those serving in our armed forces. We all know that veterans put so much on the line for our country, and all they want is support from our government, but the Liberals have passed legislation like Bill C-5, allowing criminals convicted of sexual assault to serve their sentences at home. In a military context, that could mean that right around the corner from their attacker on a small base, some could still reside.

Does the minister agree that we should repeal Bill C-5, stop soft-on-crime policies and protect not only CAF victims but all victims of sexual misconduct?

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today is about victims of sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces. We had the opportunity in the last Parliament to get Bill C-66 done, but unfortunately shenanigans in the House prevented us from doing that and it died on the Order Paper.

We are in line to getting all the recommendations in the Arbour report completed before the end of the year. I urge my colleagues not to play partisan politics and make personal attacks, and urge them to support us in getting this bill to committee so we can do a proper study of it and move it along for victims.