Evidence of meeting #160 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 process.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Unfortunately, this was not the case during the SNC-Lavalin scandal.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC
I did what I had to do as Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada to protect the justice system and respect the role of the courts.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Do you think the justice system has grown out of this scandal?
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC
As I just said, I am very proud of the way the system worked.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Unfortunately, your time is up, Mr. Deltell.
I just want to remind everyone that we are here today to talk about the nomination of the Supreme Court justice and the process that led up to that. I've been very flexible so far in permitting questions, and the minister has been very kind in answering those questions, but that is what we're here to talk about.
Next, Ms. Vandenbeld and Ms. Fortier will be sharing their time.
July 25th, 2019 / 12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Minister Lametti.
Ms. Campbell, my question follows up on something you said in an earlier response about looking at diversity and cultural literacy. I also share the disappointment that only one of the 12 candidates who put themselves forward was a woman.
I notice that in addition to professional qualifications and legal skills, the criteria also include a number of individual qualifications, such as discretion, judgment, integrity, respect and the ability to empathize. With regard to gender equality and with regard to sensitivity on gender issues, perhaps you could elaborate a little bit on how your committee was able to make sure, when you were looking at the different candidates....
What kinds of criteria and what kinds of questions did you ask regarding the various candidates' gender sensitivity?
12:10 p.m.
Chairperson, Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
This was in the broader questions of their own experience with respect to diversity. We would have an ongoing conversation, but there is no question that there were opportunities for the candidates to discuss this in their own questionnaires—and their references were asked about this. It was kind of a fundamental value, this sensitivity to gender issues and issues beyond, because these are all issues that come before the court.
I'm sorry, because if I went back and looked at the question more specifically, I could give you a more specific answer, but I think there was certainly a consensus.
Incidentally, I think half of our committee members were women and very distinguished women. There was strong institutional support for recognizing openness to the equality and equal treatment of women under the law as part of our whole mandate.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
Thank you very much.
I'll turn my time over to Ms. Fortier.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Mona Fortier Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Ms. Campbell and Mr. Lametti, thank you very much for being here today to talk to us about the process.
I'd like to go back to the issue of official languages. The ability of the Supreme Court of Canada to represent citizens in both official languages is a concern not only for me, but also for all Canadians.
We have heard a little bit about it, but I would like to know how important official languages are in the selection process. Next, I would like to know how the successful candidate meets these language requirements.
12:10 p.m.
Chairperson, Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
Not only does the candidate meet it, but the francophones on the committee in fact spoke about his français recherché. He speaks beautiful French. I think you will find that Justice Kasirer feels that his work in the civil law and in French really defines him and his connection to Quebec. It was actually quite remarkable to see that he is a man who loves the language and loves to use it in a most refined, excellent and precise way.
That is actually the whipped cream and cherry on the top of his qualifications. He's not just profoundly bilingual and profoundly competent in both languages, but also relishes the use of both languages, particularly French. I think he speaks his preferred language of expression, French, in a way that really elevates its importance.
The notion of official languages has been a criterion that has been fundamental to all three of the processes. There were some candidates who had very fine qualities who did not pass the functional bilingualism test and, therefore, were not considered for the short list. It is a principle that has been adhered to over the last three searches quite fastidiously.
It's not just that people argue in French. I think the idea is to make it possible for judges to communicate with each other and to have that capacity to reason together in either language. That is the underlying principle behind functional bilingualism.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC
I would just like to support what Ms. Campbell just said. The quality of Judge Kasirer's French is exceptional. This is a very important aspect of the process. I think the linguistic criterion has clearly been met.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
David Lametti Liberal LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC
Yes, Judge Kasirer is an anglophone, but he speaks French perfectly.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Campbell, I want to ask you about the terms of reference, where there's a provision that if there is a declared person of interest, or if a member of the advisory committee has a business or a personal relationship with somebody who has been nominated, they recuse themself from the discussion. Did that happen in your process this time?
12:15 p.m.
Chairperson, Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
Yes, it did. One of our committee members had served in a firm. I don't want to go into too much detail, but he recused himself from the conversations about that person.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON
Would that be something you'll publish in your report that follows?