I can already hear some people in the country say that extending the scope of part XVII to include bail hearings could complicate matters. Those who practise criminal law know that the language selection has to be made fairly quickly because the person is in custody and has the right to be released. So it satisfies certain requirements.
Let's say a defendant asks to be tried in English if he is in Quebec, or in French if he is elsewhere in the country. How would you respond to those who would argue that doing so would probably make things more complicated? Some people argue that having to find a judge who speaks the accused's language and constitute a court in the language of the defendant's choice could complicate things.
What would you say to those people?