First I'd like to say that I liked Mr. Fortin's remarks. However, I entirely agree with Ms. Besner's interpretation of the bill.
I would note that amendment LIB‑1 would insert the following words: “or verdict was not appealed to the court of appeal or the Supreme Court of”.
In addition, another provision concerning the independent commission reads as follows:
696.4(3) The Commission must dismiss the application as inadmissible if (a) the court of appeal has not rendered a final judgment on appeal of the finding or verdict; or (b) an appeal of the finding or verdict lies to the Supreme Court of Canada on a question of law.
I believe that provides some clarification of what Mr. Fortin raised.
In response to the comments that have been made by my colleagues Mr. Moore, Ms. Gladu and others from the Conservative benches, I would simply say that I think we all share the concerns of families and victims who have been traumatized by a trial and who may be indeed traumatized by an accused who exhausts their rights of appeal. They need to be at the forefront of our concerns. No one diminishes that, especially those of us who have grieved with families in various tragic cases. Certainly I keep that top of mind as I think about this law.
On the other hand, I would hope that my Conservative colleagues recall that for many years, the individuals who were the inspiration for this bill were themselves victims of miscarriages of justice. I think that is precisely the point Mr. Garrison was making. In our effort to ensure that those miscarriages are corrected, we have put forward a piece of legislation that sets a standard that does not aim to open the floodgates, as has been characterized, but rather sets the bar in a way that allows those who have exhausted their appeals or who choose not to appeal to come before this commission to ensure that wrongs are righted. For that reason, I do support my colleague Mr. Housefather on LIB-1, and I would urge all colleagues to vote in support of it.