Evidence of meeting #20 for Justice and Human Rights in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was offenders.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
With regard to what you are telling us, do you think that what is in the existing act is enough to achieve the objective you have described?
Professor , Department of Psychoeducation and Psychology, Université du Québec en Outaouais, As an Individual
I think it is. What I would like to happen, as Mr. Charbonneau and I said, is that we give ourselves some time. Currently, there are procedures in place to evaluate the effects of the act. That should be one of the questions we ask, we have to look at various places, in the various provinces with the various existing programs, to see how well we are achieving that balance. I can't answer that right now, except to refer to certain clinical impressions and details that come from anecdotes reported by people I may work with and collaborate with.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Charbonneau, I imagine you agree with what Mr. Dionne said.
Director, Regroupement des organismes de justice alternative du Québec
I agree completely with it, and we are in the process of adapting to the principles. We had adopted measures in the past, but the act states, in the declaration of principle, that participation by victims has to be encouraged, even in relation to specific sentences. We have projects in Quebec that will mean that victims are able to participate in the pre-sentencing process, during the sentencing phase and even post-sentencing. While the young person is in custody or on probation, we encourage victims to participate in the process, we are increasingly creating spaces to encourage them to participate.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
I would like to hear the representatives of the Barreau du Québec. Mr. Trahan, I know you have long experience in the courts, you have appeared on many occasions, we even met in that locale several times. I want to talk about the proposal to amend section 3, the effect of which is to make protecting the public the top priority. In terms of the existing provision, of what is happening right now, do we not already have what we need with section 38? And I would reiterate what my colleague Mr. Ménard said. Why take one part of section 38 and put it in section 3?
Lawyer, Barreau du Québec
Why do that? Maybe your colleagues can answer that, but the danger in doing it—
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Yes, that's right, that is exactly what I want to hear about, the danger in doing that.
Lawyer, Barreau du Québec
My colleagues could certainly also answer that, but the danger in doing it is that by incorporating that principle in section 3, it becomes a general principle of application. After that, we will see, if that provision becomes law, that as the courts make decisions, that criterion will be given priority and everything else will follow. We will be talking about protection as the priority and rehabilitation will come after, because in the bill, the paragraph we are talking about is given top priority.
Bloc
Lawyer, Research and Legislation Service, Barreau du Québec
Yes.
Bloc
Lawyer, Research and Legislation Service, Barreau du Québec
No, no, but it removes something.
Lawyer, Research and Legislation Service, Barreau du Québec
It is said that the measures taken against a young person must aim for rehabilitation. However, that aspect has been left out completely in the amendment.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
If I understand correctly, by amending section 3, it is completely ousting the whole rehabilitation aspect. It will be protecting the public and nothing else.
Lawyer, Research and Legislation Service, Barreau du Québec
No priority is being given to it now.
Bloc
Lawyer, Research and Legislation Service, Barreau du Québec
That is what we're afraid of.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
The minister tells us he drew on the Nunn report a lot in preparing this bill. Obviously, the Nunn report deals with a case that happened somewhere, and others have referred to it.
Do we in Quebec have a fairly major study on how the system works, an evaluation of it?