Evidence of meeting #103 for Justice and Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was offences.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Would you suggest that the federal government will provide sufficient funds for some of those jurisdictions to implement video conferencing capabilities?
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Jody Wilson-Raybould Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
As I said, we continue to have discussions around remote appearances working with our partners in the provinces and territories. I do just want to give Carole an opportunity to speak to one specific point.
4:55 p.m.
Director General and Senior General Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Policy Sector, Department of Justice
I just want to point out that Bill C-75 does address some of the key principles that will govern under what circumstances a remote appearance would be appropriate. It directs the court to consider all of the circumstances, including the rights of the accused to a fair, just trial, to make full answer and defence, and the circumstances where it would be appropriate, where the technology exists and for what types of procedures.
That is addressed in the bill and we'd be happy to answer other questions.
5 p.m.
Liberal
5 p.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
I am happy to defer to my colleagues who haven't had a chance to ask questions, or would like to ask more.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
That's very kind, although every single member of the committee at this point has had the right to intervene.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
You're correct. However, the minister actually needs to go at five.
Mr. Fraser, did you have a brief question, which Mr. Rankin has so kindly offered you?
5 p.m.
Liberal
Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'll be very brief.
Thank you, Mr. Rankin.
Minister, thanks so much for coming.
I have a question regarding the elimination of peremptory challenges. I know that in England they got rid of peremptory challenges in 1988 as a means to have more fairness in the system.
I'd like to hear you comment on how you think eliminating peremptory challenges will make the criminal justice system more fair.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Jody Wilson-Raybould Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
I appreciate the question. The elimination of peremptory challenges is one aspect of the jury reforms we're proposing in Bill C-75. Peremptory challenges—which is the ability of a crown or a defence counsel to eliminate an individual without giving a reason—have been considered to not provide, or to discriminate against, a broad diversity of individuals sitting on a jury.
Through the other measures in the proposed changes, we're seeking to ensure that there is the ability to have diversity on a jury.
We're going to continue to work with the provinces and territories around other reforms with respect to jury selection, given the responsibilities that provinces and territories have around lists and bringing individuals in to serve on juries, to ensure that there is a diversity of perspectives of individuals who sit on juries.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Minister Wilson-Raybould, Ms. Morency, and Mr. Taylor, thank you so much for appearing before us today.
It's very much appreciated, and we really appreciate you adjusting your schedule based on the votes.
5 p.m.
Liberal
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Thank you.
We have an in camera meeting, so we're going to suspend until the room has been cleared.
[Proceedings continue in camera]