Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning, witnesses. I sincerely thank you for your participation in this important study.
I have a limited amount of time, so I will try to balance my questions among all three of you. I have three unique areas I want to discuss.
I want to start off with this proposition.
I'm reviewing a printed summary of Professor Devlin's statement to this committee, and I couldn't agree more with paragraph 3 of that statement: “The core purpose of a complaints/discipline process for judges is to promote public confidence in the administration of justice.”
Professor, you cited a number of cases over the last several decades that have shaken that public confidence to the core.
That is an area I pursued last week, when the Minister of Justice, David Lametti, appeared before this committee. I asked him a specific question: In his view, does he believe the objective of maintaining public confidence in the justice system is in line with the complainant's interest? Is there a balance? He emphatically stated that he did believe there is a unique balance that Bill C-9 puts forth.
I would like to hear from all three witnesses.
I'll start with you, Professor Devlin. What are your thoughts on Justice Lametti's commentary and how you would improve specifically the public confidence aspect of Bill C-9?