Evidence of meeting #114 for National Defence in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-77.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Yves Robillard Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Bill C-77 will amend the National Defence Act to incorporate indigenous sentencing considerations. Military tribunals will be required to take into account the circumstances of indigenous offenders when determining sentences.
Could you please explain how sentencing will take into account the circumstances of indigenous offenders under Bill C-77?
12:25 p.m.
Lawyer, Secretariat of the Order and Legal Affairs, Barreau du Québec
Thank you for the question.
Unfortunately, we aren't able to answer that because it wasn't something the Quebec bar examined.
12:25 p.m.
President, Criminal Law Committee, Barreau du Québec
We did a bit of work on the issue, but I will give you my personal opinion, based on my experience as a lawyer.
With respect to indigenous rights, the Supreme Court of Canada held, in Gladue and Ipeelee, that the justice system had to take into account the fact that an offender was indigenous. The justice system is required to take into account an offender's indigenous descent.
The Canadian Forces include first nations members. Just think of the Rangers up north, who are part of the Primary Reserve. Applying the logic of public protection, the Quebec bar is of the view that…. Every lawyer knows that, when indigenous people are dealing with the justice system, it is absolutely essential that the community they come from be taken into account and that the consequences be adjusted accordingly, and clearly, that is true in military justice.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr
You have a few more minutes, unless you want to pass on your time.
We'll move to the next speaker, MP Spengemann.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Chair, thank you very much.
Thank you all for being here, for your service and for your expertise and your advocacy.
Mrs. Fynes, my condolences on the passing of your son, Corporal Stuart Langridge. It is my hope that through our conversation here today we are able to honour his life and honour his service, and to honour the service of all members of the Canadian Forces who died because they made a decision to take their own lives.
We heard you loud and clear that a member of the Canadian Forces who seeks help for reasons of mental health should be supported and not punished. Thank you for making that point.
My question is for Lieutenant-Colonel Perron. There are a lot of conversations throughout our government and globally on the need to have greater participation of women in our armed forces. The women, peace and security agenda and Canada's Elsie initiative on women in peace operations resonate broadly into the United Nations and beyond.
Are there gender dimensions to the points you have made to the committee earlier? In other words, do any of the recommendations, the points you have identified as worthy of attention, line up differently depending upon whether they apply to men or women, either in current practice or post-Bill C-77?
12:25 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Jean-Guy Perron
No. As I reviewed Bill C-77 focusing on the disciplinary aspect, the summary trial, summary hearings, I cannot say that I perceived any aspect of those provisions that would make me wonder if there was a gender aspect or an issue that is significant.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
In terms of gender impact in the application or also in what a young woman might look at in the recruitment stage with respect to the work environment she would step into as a member of the Canadian Armed Forces who would be subject to service discipline under Bill C-77, you don't see anything that would be concerning along gender lines?
12:30 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Jean-Guy Perron
No, I haven't seen that, but I've also been told often that there are a lot of things I don't see.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
We appreciate that. It's important to get your perspective, so thank you for that.
The other broad question I wanted to ask you—you've given advice internationally at the level of the UN—was about how our partners and allies are doing on conduct and service discipline. We often look to Australia, New Zealand, the U.K., the U.S. as potential models for peacekeeping or collaboration on security matters. What about conduct and service discipline? Have you done any research there? Are there any opportunities for us to look at their practices in informing our discussion on Bill C-77?
12:30 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Jean-Guy Perron
Definitely we should be looking, for example, at the British system or the Australian system, because we share common roots. I would not suggest looking at the American system because we are quite different, but when in looking at the British system and how they reformed their military justice system in the last few years, I feel that is a very good starting point.
The Australians have also done a lot of work in attempting to create a permanent military court, which is also, as far as I'm concerned, a very good initiative.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
That's helpful. Thank you for that.
Mr. Chair, have I one minute? Is that right?
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
I would like to look at two mechanisms that are proposed by Bill C-77 that exist in the civilian world and are used frequently there, restitution orders and restraining orders.
Mr. Lévesque, you spoke about restraining orders earlier. For either of you, how important is it that those two mechanisms are now embedded in Bill C-77? How often are they invoked? Generally, are you favourably inclined toward the provisions in Bill C-77 on these two provisions?
November 1st, 2018 / 12:30 p.m.
President, Criminal Law Committee, Barreau du Québec
As a general rule, the Quebec bar is in favour of any amendment that would bring the civilian and military justice systems into alignment. If those mechanisms are available in the civilian system, they should also be available in the military system, with any necessary adjustments, of course. It only makes sense.
I'd like to answer the question you asked earlier.
The British model is indeed an interesting one. The United Kingdom reformed how it handles summary trials. It was grappling with the same question. To what extent can the rights of military members be respected in summary trials? The U.K. changed the review and brought in a legal mechanism. It took the time to make sure the decision was informed and supported by a legal opinion. Nevertheless, the summary trial process remained as it was. It passed muster as far as the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was concerned.
12:30 p.m.
Richard Martel Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, CPC
I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today.
My question is for Lieutenant-Colonel Jean-Guy Perron.
As the Minister of National Defence tries to figure out how to address the Beaudry decision, sexual assault cases remain in limbo.
Is it possible to respect a victim's right to be informed throughout the judicial process when the Minister of National Defence isn't quite sure what's going on?
12:30 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Jean-Guy Perron
I'm not sure whether I can answer your question, Mr. Martel.
To be frank, I don't really have an answer.
12:30 p.m.
Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, CPC
In light of the Jordan decision, establishing the right of an accused to a timely trial, is it possible that cases involving serious offences committed by members of the Canadian Forces could be dropped?
12:30 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Jean-Guy Perron
I don't want to answer blindly, but anything is possible.
Is it likely? It all depends on the nature of the offence. There is always the option of laying criminal charges under the civilian system to make sure the offence is tried. The idea isn't to let the offence go or drop the case. There are ways to ensure that justice is served, despite the current circumstances.
12:35 p.m.
Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, CPC
I have a question for Mr. Lévesque.
Please describe, if you would, how the Beaudry decision will impact Bill C-77.
12:35 p.m.
President, Criminal Law Committee, Barreau du Québec
It's hard for the Quebec bar to answer that, since it's not something we've looked into. I could answer in my capacity as a lawyer, but since the bar hasn't examined the issue, I can't really comment.
Generally speaking, however, as a lawyer, I can tell you that the Beaudry decision affects the right to a trial by jury. Let's see what the Supreme Court says. The prosecution has asked the Supreme Court to consider the matter. Will it uphold or set aside the decision of the Court Martial Appeal Court? I have no idea.
That said, the bill is moving its way through Parliament. Clearly, in the meantime, no cases can be prosecuted. The bar hasn't studied the impact of the Beaudry decision. Frankly, it's hard to answer your question.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr
Before we go to MP Fisher, two more people have joined us at the table. They are Corporal Stuart Langridge's father, Shaun, and his brother Michael. Thank you for joining us.
I'm going to give the floor to MP Fisher.