Thank you very much.
Madam Chair, members of the committee, on behalf of the members of the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC), I sincerely thank you for your invitation.
The Council was created in 1971 to ensure better administration of justice, to exercise clear authority in overseeing judicial conduct and to assume explicit responsibility with respect to the continuing education of judges.
The independence of the judiciary requires judges to be in charge of the professional training of judges. In return, that requires the judiciary to ensure public trust in the competence of the judges.
The CJC has been a leader in professional training, including in bringing awareness to social issues such as sexual violence.
I am confident that in collaboration with the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, the National Judicial Institute, and others, the CJC has put in place an outstanding system of judicial education, one that is internationally recognized for its quality.
Unfortunately we've done a very poor job of explaining this publicly, of telling the success story, so I'd like to give just a few highlights about what I think is a success story.
In 1989 the CJC, in its annual report, identified a concern with regard to the treatment of sexual assault cases by judges. The report outlined that a new training program was needed on gender issues so that judges could address gender issues with justice and with sensitivity. Other issues surfaced—aboriginal justice, poverty, mental health, racism—and the CJC created at that time a committee on equality in the courts.
The CJC worked with scholars, with the CBA, with government, and with community groups and adopted, in 1994, a policy of comprehensive, in-depth, credible education programs on social context issues. In 1997 chief justices of the council committed to providing the time and opportunity for all judges to take part in social context programs. As these programs developed, the CJC directed the NJI to include social context education in all of its programming, and that's where we stand today.
To ensure that we continue on this path of comprehensive education for judges, the CJC adopted just last week a resolution for mandatory participation in the seminar for all new federally appointed judges. This is in addition to the long-standing policy of the CJC requiring all judges to devote at least 10 days to professional development each year.
I conclude by emphasizing that professional development is for judges an ethical obligation. It's something that we take very seriously at the CJC. Failure to uphold that ethical obligation may well require a review of the judge's conduct.
I think Bill C-337 provides an opportunity to increase transparency in this area. The CJC has some ideas about the proposed legislation. For example, we think that the objectives sought in proposed subsection 2(2) would be met more effectively by requiring candidates for the judiciary to sign an undertaking on their application form to abide by CJC policies on judicial education, something that we will propose to the minister shortly.
I would also respectfully suggest to the members of the committee that if you want any views, advice, or suggestions when you enter the clause-by-clause review, I am at your disposal.
I look forward to your questions.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.