Official Languages Committee on May 11th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3), we're studying the full implementation of the Official Languages Act in the Canadian justice system.

I want to welcome our friends who are joining us this morning, Mr. McColeman and Ms. Alleslev. I also want to welcome the witnesses representing KortoJura. They are the Honourable Denise LeBlanc, judge responsible for the legal language education program; Allain Roy, director general of the legal language education program; Normand Fortin, who works on conceptualization, content and certification for the evaluation service; and Françoise Bonnin, director of the evaluation service.

I want to welcome everyone here.

We'll listen to you for about 10 minutes. I don't know whether you want to share your speaking time or how you want to work. Then, we'll go around the table and take questions and comments.

Ms. LeBlanc, the floor is yours.

[Denise LeBlanc, Judge responsible for the Program, Legal Language Education Program, KortoJura]

Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for inviting me to appear before the committee as part of the study of the full implementation of the Official Languages Act. We appreciate the opportunity to share the activities implemented based our vision for achieving the ideal in terms of access to justice in both official languages for individuals subject to trials across Canada.

The activities in question started in 2011, when the Provincial Court of New Brunswick proposed that the Canadian Judicial Council create a language education program for provincially appointed Canadian judges. Justice Yvette Finn was appointed the judge responsible for the program.

This initiative led to a legal language education program that emphasizes the practical aspect and that has a legal language proficiency evaluation component, known as KortoJura.

In January 2017, I took over from Justice Finn as the judge responsible for the program. I'm proud to introduce the people joining me today. Mr. Chair has already introduced them. They are Allain Roy, director general of the education program, and Normand Fortin, a language specialist and the person responsible for the conceptualization and content of the KortoJura evaluation service. Françoise Bonnin is also here today to answer any questions regarding KortoJura.

I'll now give the floor to Mr. Roy, who will provide an overview of the language education sessions.

[Allain Roy, Director General, Legal Language Education Program, KortoJura]

Thank you.

Since spring 2011, over 20 legal language education sessions have been provided. More than 100 judges from all Canadian provinces and territories have come to either the Caraquet region, in the Acadian Peninsula, for French sessions, or to the Saint Andrews region for English sessions. In addition, the teaching teams consist of about 40 judges and lawyers.

The program is based in two welcoming New Brunswick communities that are proud to share their culture. Along with the formal educational activities, other activities involve interacting with the community. These activities include quiz rallies, the creation of mini-documentaries, or “murder mystery” nights. We're only limited by our imagination, and the goal is always the same. We want to create opportunities for communication.

We must also mention the involvement of the legal community and the RCMP. They enhance the education sessions by participating in various exercises, such as mock trials. In terms of numbers since the start of the program, this community effort has involved over 150 community volunteers, about 20 lawyers, a little over 20 RCMP officers, approximately 40 actors, and more than 55 artists.

Two French and two English sessions are held each year. These sessions have had a significant economic impact on the regions concerned, especially since they take place outside the peak tourist season.

Our next challenge is to run other activities between the sessions to maintain the skills acquired and to provide ongoing training. We're exploring technological platforms to make tools for mentoring or tutoring programs available online. Using these new technologies, we also want to create a virtual community with all the judges who participate in our sessions. We want a Canada-wide network of knowledge sharing so that judges from the two language communities can help each other.

[Denise LeBlanc]

To give context to Mr. Roy's remarks, I'll highlight some components of our training approach.

The Centre canadien du français juridique prepares and delivers the program's educational content, in cooperation with the teams of trainers, who deliver the education session content.

The teams of trainers consist of experienced lawyers, a language specialist and judges who support the trainers.

The education sessions have two components. They have a community learning component, which Mr. Roy has already explained, and an educational component, which links daily activities with the judges' acquisition of language skills. At each education session, a theme is adopted based on the nature of the most common charges in the provincial court.

Participants learn through activities that focus on oral and written comprehension and communication in the second language, and through simulation activities that recreate, as accurately as possible, legal activities in the courtroom.

Since 2014, English sessions have been provided to judges in Quebec, in cooperation with the Conseil de la magistrature. The cooperation and support among language communities and various stakeholders continue after the education sessions. Learners become trainers who can support their fellow judges across Canada and build ties that far exceed the benefits anticipated at the start.

Regarding KortoJura, from the start of the education program, the language proficiency evaluation has been part of the objectives, given the needs. These include the need to measure the participants' progress in order to assess the program's effectiveness; the need to give the teaching team the chance to adapt education methods to the participants' needs; the need to enable the judges to conduct a self-evaluation; and lastly, the need to show the chief justices their judges' language proficiency level.

The evaluation tools have been administered and validated. They have given us the chance to implement the vision of an autonomous and independent project in the form of a legal language evaluation service.

I'll now give the floor to Mr. Fortin. He'll address the evaluation and certification of oral communication proficiency in the second official language in a legal context.

[Normand Fortin, Conceptualization, test content and certification, Evaluation Service, KortoJura]

Thank you.

The tools consist of two tests, the oral comprehension test and the oral communication test in a legal context. Each test is marked based on the proficiency scale I'll tell you about shortly. The oral comprehension test is taken online using a computer or tablet. The oral communication test is taken in person or online in real time using secure software, in the form of a guided discussion with a lawyer facilitator and a language proficiency evaluation expert.

The proficiency scale was created by a committee of judges and second language evaluation experts. It served as a guide for the development of the tests. The scale is based on tasks that a judge must normally accomplish. The judges who developed the grid with me ranked the various tasks based on their complexity and the language proficiency level needed to accomplish them. We created four levels of language proficiency, which were refined throughout the training and evaluation process. I could explain what these levels represent during the question period.

Regarding the structure of the test, the oral comprehension test uses several authentic recordings from courtrooms. The candidates must answer multiple choice questions, single answer questions or open questions based on the recordings. The oral communication test in the form of a discussion includes four segments that gradually progress from level 1 to level 4 on the proficiency scale.

The candidate first reads a decision written in his or her mother tongue, then discusses the decision with a judge or lawyer evaluator in the language of the test. For the certification, after the test, the evaluators immediately agree on an assessment using the evaluation grid created for that purpose. They then recommend that KortoJura's chief evaluator certify the candidate at one of the levels of legal French. They also establish the shortcomings the candidate must address to reach the next level.

We're currently developing the Legal English Listening Test for francophone judges. The test will be validated shortly with the judges who took the training in Saint Andrews.

In closing, I would say that our tests are unique, since they were designed and developed in cooperation with judges. They cover real situations experienced by judges, and they have been validated by judges. The tests are corrected by judges, and those same judges help prepare the final evaluation of the language proficiency of the person taking the test. To our knowledge, no other evaluation tool in Canada or around the world meets these criteria.

The KortoJura evaluation service, a product of the language education program for judges, wants to take a broader approach and create tests for specialists in different legal fields based on the same model. We think the service will play a significant role in improving access to justice in both official languages for Canadian individuals subject to trials.

Thank you for inviting us to share our work with you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you for your presentation.

Since five people have already asked to speak, they will each have six minutes.

We'll start with Sylvie Boucher.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Hello, everyone. I'm happy to see you.

I want to know one thing. The KortoJura program was designed by judges. I checked the website where people can take the test. The test takes at least two hours. Is that correct?

Do the provinces recognize the test that you make available online? I'm talking about the provinces with a francophone minority. I imagine you're everywhere.

Also, why is it so important that the next Supreme Court judges be bilingual?

I want to hear your opinion on these issues.

[Françoise Bonnin, Director, Evaluation Service, KortoJura]

The test wasn't developed only for judges in New Brunswick. In the education program, judges come from all Canadian provinces. My colleague Allain Roy could elaborate on this.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Okay. Perfect.

[Françoise Bonnin]

So it's not at all restricted to one province.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

It's broader.

[Françoise Bonnin]

Yes.

[Normand Fortin]

Regarding whether the program has been accepted by each province, I think it remains to be seen.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

It remains to be seen? Okay.

That's what I wanted to know. That said, New Brunswick recognizes it.

We know that Parliament is responsible for the test for bilingual judges, but the province often has input.

The test leads to a certification. Is the certification recognized by the province? Is it recognized anywhere?

[Denise LeBlanc]

I can talk a bit about that.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Yes.

[Denise LeBlanc]

Currently, in the provincial appointment process in New Brunswick, the test isn't mandatory or formally recognized. We're not at the point of requiring a test.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Okay. That's fine. That's what I wanted to know.

This test could help us a great deal. I'm thinking of the francophones outside Quebec and the use of the correct terms.

Personally, I wouldn't pass the test, since I'm not a lawyer and I never wanted to be a judge either.

How many people pass the test at a satisfactory level, meaning at a high level?

[Normand Fortin]

Maybe I should explain the proficiency scale of our education program.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Yes, I would appreciate that.

[Normand Fortin]

There are four levels.

I cut this part out of my original text.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

That's fine. That's what I wanted to know.

[Normand Fortin]

There are really four levels of competence.

I am not one of those who started the program. I work in the languages sector.

Judge Finn started the program. She started from the principle that a judge does not really need to become completely bilingual to perform certain duties for which a certain knowledge of French is sufficient.

Thus, in our competence grid the person who has the first level, i.e. FJ1, should have a level of competence that is sufficient to preside over an undisputed single case, or an administrative hearing. It can be an adjournment, a plea or a request for an individual to plead guilty or not guilty.

There are judges who took the training who are now able to do that. Judge Finn's vision—and I think it is also Ms. LeBlanc's vision—was to clear up some of the backlog in the justice system.

If we can have enough judges with that linguistic level, we will have succeeded. However, at this time our sample is not large enough to say that this can be generalized. That said, we can see the results among the judges who take our training in Caraquet.

As for the other levels, the FJ2 level is higher than the FJ1. At that level a judge can preside over several successive hearings in a day, where the challenged elements are rather simple, but could require testimony; for instance, a bail hearing, or simple trials.

At the FJ3 level a judge is able to preside over the majority of hearings, but he could run into trouble if there was a disputed case involving several parties or several witnesses.

At the FJ4 level a judge can function in an environment where the vast majority of judicial activities take place in the second official language.

As you can see the FJ1 is not a beginner's level. The judge has to have learned French as a second language before it can be said that he or she has reached the FJ1 level.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Approximately how many judges a year take this training or take the test?

[Allain Roy]

As I was saying, since 2011 about 100 judges attended over 300 classes.

There are judges who sometimes return; there are two sessions per year. About 20 judges register for each session.

The same thing applies to legal English; they are judges from Quebec for the most part.

We can also link this with the background work that was done, and the tools developed by Mr. Fortin and the judges who took the training. For instance, we were able to validate the tests easily, because we know the judges and their linguistic level very well.

At this time I think we have to publicize our tests and have them accepted by different bodies.