We now go to questions and comments, the hon. member for Yukon.
House of Commons Hansard #29 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was assault.
House of Commons Hansard #29 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was assault.
Judges ActGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes
We now go to questions and comments, the hon. member for Yukon.
Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)
Madam Speaker, the member always has very erudite speeches. Like the member, I am very passionate in my support of this bill. I will probably not ask a question, but let him carry on because I know he always has a lot of very important input. However, I want to make a couple of comments.
One was mentioned earlier this afternoon. Over and above the bill, which is very important, Bill C-51 added some very important steps. I want to ensure that all the elements of Bill C-51 are implemented so we can get the full benefit of the bill to deal with this.
The second point I want to make is that I am very strongly in support of indigenous involvement in designing the training. Indigenous women and girls, who are often the targets and victims, come from a different culture and a different history of their own unique legal systems. They are different social structures of which we just cannot understand—
Judges ActGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton
I will have to leave it there to permit some other interventions.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Yukon for his kind words.
He mentioned Bill C-51, which was an omnibus justice bill from the last Parliament. If I recall rightly, it contained many different elements about many different issues. To the member's point, sometimes when we have these kinds of omnibus bills, there are particular elements of it that get relatively less discussion.
What the member is pointing out with respect to indigenous communities is something I was talking about in a slightly different context. I was talking a bit about our engagement internationally and the link we sometimes see between violence against women and violence against minority communities and that women from minority communities are sometimes particularly targeted. The member is speaking about something in a similar context in Canada. That is an important complement to some of the points I was making more broadly, that we need to understand human rights and the dignity of the person in an integrated way.
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking my hon. colleague for his speech.
It is always a pleasure to listen to him. He tends to build solid arguments and is glad to share ideas. I would even say I found the first part of his speech rather dazzling, but perhaps more because of its delivery than its substance.
We are here to exchange ideas. Most members of the House agree with this bill, and we will be supporting it. However, it is important to remember that there has been some criticism, particularly from the Quebec bar, which believes that this bill jeopardizes the independence of the judicial system. I would like to hear my hon. colleague's point of view on that, and I will put on my sunglasses to listen to him.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his remarks.
The member is asking about the issue of judicial independence and how that interacts with this bill. The mechanisms that would be put in place with this bill would respect judicial independence. They involve a person committing to undertake training, but they preserve a level of autonomy in pursuing that training. The decision they make is ultimately still up to them, the things they say, how they make those determinations and so forth. They have to commit to the training, but in practice there does not seem to be a way of compelling them to do it.
In some respects that is a limitation, but it may well be a necessary limitation in that it preserves the independence of judges to act independent of the legislature even though we are going as far as we can within the balance of judicial independence to very strongly recommend the value of this particular training.
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Mr. Speaker, my colleague made some references to the per cent of reporting in Canada and also some of the incidents that happened overseas in different countries and victims who were in minority groups.
I often hear of the need for protecting women or to provide them a safe place. I can completely relate and understand that, and it is necessary. However, would the member also think it is necessary to perhaps do a better job at educating our men, ensuring they are not committing these types of offences against women? We know nine out of 10 incidences involving sexual assault are female victims. We are also not doing so well in the country when we look at the statistics. We have a very low conviction rate.
Does the member think our system is also one that is broken? Perhaps we do not have as strong of a judicial system as we may think compared to other countries.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, this bill is about providing training to judges in Canada. It is one that I strongly support because I think it is absolutely necessary. I completely agree as well with the member's comment that education as well as character formation for men is critically important. Most of the victims of sexual violence are women. Most of the perpetrators, statistically, are men. Absolutely, that is important and complementary to the point I made.
With respect to the international context, as we seek to make reforms in our system, we can see the need to strengthen the effectiveness of justice systems as being an important part of our international development assistance as well. Just as I do not think we should wait until poverty is fully solved at home before addressing poverty overseas, I do not think we should wait until this problem is fully solved at home before we engage overseas.
We also need to recognize the issue of online sexual exploitation means, unfortunately, in these crimes there may be links. There may be victims overseas who are being victimized by perpetrators in Canada. It speaks to the need for an international perspective and for that collaboration.
Chris Lewis Conservative Essex, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the recognition in the House this evening. Bill C-3 is a vital bill to speak to. I want to thank my hon. colleague for his remarks and his speech. I echo his remarks about celebrating Rona Ambrose and her being such a vital aspect to this proposed legislation.
I know that each and every member of this House is responsible for certain training. As a matter of fact, just this upcoming Monday I will be taking the House of Commons harassment training, so training is vital. It does not matter if one is a member of Parliament, or what profession one comes through, it is absolutely vital.
The previous speaker, the hon. member from the Liberal party, said that this legislation cannot come too soon. My hon. member, with as much passion, said it is time to speak out. How detrimental was shutting down the government to allowing people to speak out?
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the point that my colleague is making. The prorogation of Parliament was a mistake. We can identify many vital areas of work that were either halted or put on hold as a result of that, including the important study being done at the Canada-China committee on Hong Kong, the work on this bill and other legislative items. There were certain aspects of the fiscal response to COVID-19 that were also delayed as a result of prorogation.
Across the board, on all of these issues, we have had a situation where the government prorogued Parliament, which caused a big delay, and then we came back and it said that we needed to rush.
I think it was very clearly a mistake. It was a mistake that was aimed at addressing political controversy around the WE scandal, as opposed to the public interest.
Francesco Sorbara LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, it is great to be here today, back in our nation's capital again for another sitting week.
I rise today in support of Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code. This bill is a key step to ensuring that each individual who interacts with our justice system is treated with the dignity, respect and compassion they deserve. I am eager to see this important bill continue to move through the legislative process.
Bill C-3 would amend the Judges Act to ensure that all newly appointed provincial superior court judges take part in training on social context and sexual assault law. This bill would also propose that when the Canadian Judicial Council develops seminars on sexual assault law, it does so following consultations with groups that the council considers appropriate, such as sexual assault survivors and organizations supporting them.
Bill C-3 also seeks to have the council report to the Minister of Justice on the seminars offered related to sexual assault law and social context. Finally, this bill would require judges to provide reasons for decisions under certain sexual assault provisions of the Criminal Code.
I am proud to note that Bill C-3 continues to be an example of parliamentary collaboration on key issues that have an impact on Canadians. The bill before us today is identical to Bill C-5, which was referred to committee before Parliament was prorogued.
Like Bill C-5, Bill C-3 reflects the private member's bill introduced by the former interim leader of the Conservative Party, the Hon. Rona Ambrose. I want to thank her for her work and her commitment to these important issues. I look forward to continuing our collaboration to ensure that this bill is brought before the other place and that Canadians can benefit from the important changes it seeks to make.
This evening I would like to focus my remarks on the importance of social context training for judges. In particular, I would like to address how the social context education provisions in Bill C-3 would help ensure an inclusive justice system that is free from systemic racism and system discrimination.
Each individual who appears in court is more than a claimant, respondent or witness. They are not just a name on a legal document or a face in a courtroom. An individual's engagement with the justice system is deeply intertwined with their life outside of court. They bring with them to court their experiences, their stories and their context. To ensure that all people who engage with the justice system are treated respectfully, fairly and equally, judges need to understand the realities of these individuals who appear before them. Bill C-3 recognizes this need.
By requiring candidates to superior court benches to participate in continuing education on social context, Bill C-3 would help ensure that new judges are aware of the many factors that can affect a person's involvement in the justice system.
Bill C-3 would amend the Judges Act to restrict eligibility for judicial appointment to a provincial superior court to persons who undertake to participate in continuing education on matters related to social context after their appointment. This means that every new provincial superior court judge would begin their tenure on the bench with this important training.
Social context refers to a range of factors that impact an individual's reality and experiences, including experiences leading up with their interaction with the justice system, their first contact with the justice system and their experiences before a judge. The factors that make up social context intersect an individual's life. Social context includes systemic racism and systemic discrimination.
Bill C-3 reflects this reality. During the clause-by-clause study of this bill, the member for Hull—Aylmer proposed an amendment to specify that systemic racism and systemic discrimination are part of social context. I was pleased to support this critical amendment and see it pass at committee.
For too many Canadians, notably indigenous peoples, and Black and racialized Canadians, systemic racism and systemic discrimination are lived realities. We see this in health care, access to economic opportunity and our justice system. We know that indigenous, Black and racialized Canadians are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. We also know that Canadians who experience systemic racism and systemic discrimination face structural barriers to access to justice, barriers that have sadly been worsened by the pandemic.
Amending Bill C-3 to specify that social context includes systemic racism and systemic discrimination reflects where we are as a nation, where we are as a country. We have work to do.
Our government is committed to doing that work. We released Canada's anti-racism strategy for 2019 through 2022. We are investing in economic empowerment for racialized communities. We are combatting online hate, and we are creating a unified approach to better collect disaggregated data. Through these and other actions, we are taking concrete steps to combat systemic racism and systemic discrimination in their many incarnations, including in the justice system. Bill C-3 will help us achieve this critical goal.
Bill C-3 focuses on the importance of providing training for judges that addresses racism and systemic discrimination. When appointed, judges should be aware of the reality lived and experienced by the people who will come before them. The requirement for social context education set out in Bill C-3 would ensure that new judges have this awareness.
Learning about social context will ensure that newly appointed judges are aware of systemic racism, systemic discrimination and the ways these pervasive problems impact individuals' experiences with the justice system. When judges have this fundamental awareness, courtrooms are more sensitized, hospitable and inclusive. A judge who is aware of social context is, for example, better prepared to ensure that a racialized young woman with a disability appearing in court experiences a justice system that is respectful and responsive to her reality. Social context training supports understanding, empathy and appropriate judgments for all Canadians.
By bolstering judges' awareness of the context in which they fulfill their functions, social context training ensures myths and stereotypes or personal societal biases do not play a role in their decisions. Social context shapes the experiences of all individuals who interact with the justice system, whether they are before a judge, in superior court, or in provincial or territorial court. That is why our government is also working with our partners to improve the availability of training on social context for provincially and territorially appointed judges.
We must ensure that our justice system treats everyone with respect and dignity. The team work involved requires the collaboration of all parties and potential stakeholders in the justice system.
Together, we must work to ensure that Canadians have access to a justice system that is responsive, inclusive and free from systemic racism and systemic discrimination. This bill is an important step toward these goals, and I am eager to continue to work with my colleagues to move Bill C-3 forward.
Louise Charbonneau Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent speech.
The Bloc Québécois believes that passing this bill serves the interest of Canadians. As the member stated, this is about trust, awareness, emotions and social context. Bill C-3 touches on our beliefs, our values and our emotions. Victims, just like judges, have their own value systems, which vary greatly from one person to the next.
Does my colleague believe that the training given to judges will truly have an impact on the decisions they will have to make in sexual assault cases?
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, my answer, quite simply, is that, yes, this will have a positive impact on our justice system. It will have a positive impact, once the law is put in place and implemented, for judges to be more sensitized to the needs of Canadians who face systemic discrimination and racism. Bill C-3 would also reaffirm the principle judicial independence for our legal community and judges, and rightly so.
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.
Of course it is necessary to train judges to ensure they have increased knowledge and awareness when dealing with cases of sexual assault. That is something that the Bloc Québécois supports.
However, there is another skill that is important when becoming a judge in the highest court in this country, and that is language skills. Right now, there is no legal obligation for judges to be bilingual.
I want to give some background. In 2006, Stephen Harper's Conservative government appointed a unilingual anglophone judge to the Supreme Court of Canada, which caused quite an uproar. Many francophones in Canada, particularly in Quebec, were appalled by this insulting decision. Then, in 2010, Commissioner of Official Languages Graham Fraser stated that bilingualism should be an essential criteria for becoming a judge, particularly in the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, in 2011, Stephen Harper's Conservative government appointed another unilingual anglophone judge.
Today, the Minister of Official Languages, the member for Ahuntsic-Cartierville, very strongly suggested that French was declining in Quebec and Canada.
Does my colleague believe that Supreme Court judges should be officially required to be bilingual?
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, bilingualism is a very important factor for me and my family, but I would generally state that Bill C-3 would improve the confidence in our justice system for all Canadians, especially sexual assault survivors, and that is the intent of the bill.
I also wish to thank the hon. member who brought forward the original incarnation of the bill, the Hon. Rona Ambrose.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the member could provide his thoughts on how encouraging it is to see all political entities in the House of Commons get behind the legislation, which will ultimately see it passed.
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, the collaboration that we are seeing on Bill C-3 is great to see and it reflects the reality of where we are as a nation. We want to move forward on breaking down barriers, especially for systemic racism and systemic discrimination, and we want to make sure that survivors of sexual assault have the confidence to come forward, and that their stories will be listened to in a manner that is appropriate. I wish to thank the justice committee for its great work on this and the Minister of Justice for his great work on Bill C-3.
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to be here today to address Bill C-3. It has gone through committee and is now back in the House of Commons, and we once again get an opportunity to speak to it.
I want to point out that this is a pleasant departure for the Liberal Party in supporting the bill. In the past the Liberals have typically been odious, pointing out errors that the justice system gets. For them to give clear instructions to the justice system is refreshing. I am excited to see that they are supporting the bill, that they have moved it forward and that we have the Government of Canada pursuing education of judges.
We have seen in the past some horrendous crimes that have been committed in this country, and we have seen sentencing that does not seem to fit the crime. The sentencing does not provide an incentive to not do the crime again. I am talking particularly in the area that I know best, around human trafficking. I have a series of examples in which folks were convicted of trafficking people and the justice system was incapable, or folks in the justice system were rude about what was going on. It led to people being concerned and not willing to come forward when they had a crime perpetrated against them.
I remember one situation in which a gal was talking to me. She had come forward and pressed charges against an individual, but the guy was out on bail very quickly and was standing at the end of her driveway making threatening gestures such as slicing across his throat. This is a justice system that was supposed to be there to protect her. I am happy to see the government supporting the bill to provide judge training, and it is important that we get it right. The justice system should get it right.
I also want to note that I will share my time with the member for Mégantic—L'Érable, a great colleague of mine. I also had the opportunity to tour him across the promised land. He is from Quebec and I am from Alberta. I know there is a bit of rivalry there, although it is more imagined than real because when I had him, a Quebecker, in Alberta, I stuck him in a trench of a pipeline and showed him what pipelines were all about. He was impressed with the size of the farms that we have where I come from. He is the member of Parliament for the maple syrup capital of Canada, and I am the member of Parliament for the honey capital of Canada, which I think is pretty sweet, either way. I do take a little honey in my coffee because I think that makes me a little sweeter all the time.
We have seen human traffickers get off with sentences that were in many cases less time than they had spent trafficking their victims. We have seen traffickers who trafficked multiple girls for several years get months in prison. We also see traffickers, who have made hundreds of thousands of dollars trafficking people, get fines of $5,000. It is important to me that the justice system provides justice and deterrence. It says in the Bible that the law cannot save us, and that is true. The words on a piece of paper will not in the instant save someone, but we do try to rectify these situations after the fact. Our justice system is to bring justice to the situation. We see in the bill the acknowledgement that our justice system does not get it right all the time.
From time to time, things change, things come to light, society changes and society sees the need to shine a spotlight on particular issues. That is what this bill does. I am pleased to support the bill.
However, this is a departure from what we have seen in the past. We have seen the Liberals hesitate on bringing justice through the justice system for human trafficking victims. When it comes to consecutive sentencing, we saw a bill that was first introduced by a Bloc member, then was introduced by an NDP member and it was finally passed under a Conservative government. It was brought into force by the Liberal government.
However, before the bill was brought into force, the government waited for two years to pass Bill C-75. It could have been brought into force immediately when it took power back in 2015, but the government waited in order to pull out consecutive sentencing, because, lo and behold, if a trafficker had to go to jail for an extended period of time, that would not have been right.
The Liberals delayed the passing of that bill. While it had originally been introduced in 2013, it took all the way until 2017 to be reintroduced. We see that when the bill was finally brought, the Liberals had pulled the consecutive sentencing out and went back to concurrent sentencing, saying if someone had trafficked one girl, they were going to jail for a maximum of 10 years, and if they had trafficked 10 girls, they could serve those sentences concurrently. Regardless of how many people they had trafficked, they would serve the sentences concurrently.
That is not justice. That is not bringing people to justice. That is not providing any deterrent. Perhaps the Liberals will stand up and ask me questions about this, and maybe they will clarify whether they actually believe that deterrence should be something that is part of our justice system. Do Liberals believe that deterrence is part of our justice system?
At the end of the day, serious penalties for this type of sexual violence is important. However, it is more important to provide real protection for victims who endure years of trauma and take years to recover, knowing that their trafficker could be out and back on the streets before they have been fully integrated back into society.
Today we see that judges are still handing down human trafficking sentences that do not reflect the seriousness of the crime. The government refuses to send a message to traffickers by mandating serious penalties.
I propose that the government, at the very least, consider adopting a similar approach to human trafficking as it did on this bill. Judicial training on human trafficking law would be unprecedented. Maybe we could go beyond this. Maybe we could look at special courts. I know there are a number of special courts in Canada. We see drug courts where there are two doors. If someone is convicted of a drug crime, there are two doors. One is rehabilitation; the other is jail. People can choose which door they want to go through. If they do not abide by the conditions set when they cross the first door, then they are switched to the second door.
Those kinds of things have been successful in Canada. I think Ontario is the province that has been pushing that the most. I think that is great. In Alberta, we have the child advocacy centre. It is not a special court, but it is a centre where children of sexual abuse come. There are complete wraparound services. It is not a sterile institutionalized facility. There are puppy dogs wandering around. There are nice trees. The whole place is a place to put people at ease.
All of the government services that come into play in a case of child abuse come to the child, rather than sending the child through multiple different institutions. That, again, has been a great model and is something that we could see across Canada, in terms of dealing with human trafficking victims.
While I support the government's initiative around the bill, I hope that we can see some of these other things that Conservatives are pushing for that get our justice system to provide justice but also, on the front end, prevent these crimes from happening by providing a deterrent.
It is always an honour and privilege to rise in the House of Commons.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that has been talked about in the third reading and a bit in second reading is how wonderful it is to see the unanimous support for a good idea. What would make the idea even better is if we were to see more and more provinces look at their appointments.
Could the member share his thoughts on what role we could have in encouraging this? I believe Ontario has moved forward and possibly another province has. What are his thoughts on that?
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, I know appointments are a very important part of the judicial system. What I always say about the judicial system is that we have to get it right. If the average Canadian thinks the case is being judged fairly, then we are getting it right. If we are not getting it judged right, then we have a problem and we need to have a chat with the judges, which is what the bill would do.
As to provincial jurisdiction, I am always concerned about treading on provincial jurisdiction. I have close colleagues who work in provincial legislatures and I talk to them about the bills I am working on, the ideas I have and they do the same. On appointments and training for judges, we should be working hand in glove with the provinces.
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague for his excellent speech.
The Quebec bar has expressed some concerns about Bill C-3, particularly because the vast majority of criminal offences are handled in provincial courts.
Training for judges is a good idea, but the Quebec bar has pointed out that many of these cases will be handled by provincial judges and not federal ones.
Does my colleague think that this could create some irregularities or lead to an uneven administration of justice across Canada?
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, no, I do not think that will be a problem at all. The bar association can step up for sure. I believe it represents both federal and provincial lawyers. The bar associations could provide this training, which would be more useful than us having to pass bills on that.
Rob Morrison Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his work on human trafficking, which is so important.
My question is on accountability. We seem to have an issue with accountability. He mentioned some of it with the sentencing. With respect to Bill C-3, which I support, how does the member propose there will be accountability for the justices so they actually follow through with what we want them to do in the bill?
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly the issue all the time. If we go back to the appointments, which the member from Winnipeg talked about, this kind of training sends a message to the judicial system as to our expectations in this place.
As for accountability, there is an independence between this place and the judiciary which we must always appreciate. There can be a conversation about it, but that is always going to be a challenge. I do not see a great accountability structure at this point, so we really just send a message and hope that is the case. It goes back to appointing the right people. Appointments are very important.
I know the member for Kootenay—Columbia is right next door to Alberta. I like to call him an honorary Albertan. Any time that part of the province wants to join Alberta, come on down. However, I want to point out that the Alberta government has aggressively pursued anti-human trafficking measures. It has come out with a great strategy on ending human trafficking in Alberta. I hope the federal government can get behind this and bring in a national strategy that works for all Canadians.
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to be here this evening. First, I would like to commend and thank my colleague from Peace River—Westlock for his excellent speech. I was impressed by the pipeline construction I saw when I had the opportunity and the pleasure to visit his riding. Perhaps we could find a new use for pipelines. We could send maple syrup from the beautiful riding of Mégantic—L'Érable to his riding via pipeline in the spring and then Mégantic—L'Érable could get delicious honey from his riding the same way in the fall. That would be an excellent opportunity for trade between our two ridings.
It is with honour and enthusiasm that I rise today at third reading of Bill C-3, which is also known as the just act. I hope it will help women who are victims of sexual assault to regain some trust in the justice system and encourage them to come forward when they are assaulted.
I would like to remind members that this is the third time that the House has tried to pass the just act. We must give its original author, the Hon. Rona Ambrose, all the credit for bringing before the House the serious issue of the lack of training of some judges who hear sexual assault cases.
When introducing the just bill, which was private member's Bill C-337 at the time, my hon. colleague Ms. Ambrose said:
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to stand in the House to introduce a bill to address the need to build more confidence in our judicial system when it comes to the handling of cases involving sexual assault and sexual violence. Too often, those involved in these cases come away with the feeling they have experienced not just a judgment on their case but a judgment on their character.
On another occasion, she gave more detail to explain why women are afraid to file a complaint. She talked about what survivors go through in the justice system and the repercussions it has on them:
We have people who have backgrounds in corporate law, and oil and gas law who are overseeing some of these trials. That's not good enough. They need to have the training in criminal law and particularly in these kinds of cases, I believe. We know from research that's conclusive now that these kinds of crimes and this kind of trauma, especially at a young age, have a massive impact on girls and women. We know that women who experience violence are at least twice as likely to suffer from mental health issues, and they deal with these issues for the rest of their lives.
Clearly, the justice system is frightening for women who are victims of sexual assault. The statistics are clear: too few women report the assault, even fewer go to trial, and an infinitely small number of those trials end in convictions.
As I mentioned in my speech at second reading of Bill C-3, the numbers do not lie: 83% of sexual assaults go unreported. Of the remaining 17% of cases, one in five gets dropped, while the other four are subjected to intense scrutiny, leaving the victims caught in the middle of a difficult and stressful process that unfortunately has only a small chance of success. In three out of four cases, the proceedings are stayed, and just one in five will go to court. One in 10 cases ends in a conviction resulting in a fine or jail time.
Can we seriously ask women who are victims of sexual assault, especially women from disadvantaged, racialized or indigenous communities, to trust a system that finds it so difficult to recognize the crimes committed against them and punish those responsible?
Let me talk about a study I read. The topic of this action research study was “Female victims of violence and the criminal justice system: experiences, obstacles and potential solutions”. This study was conducted by several groups in Quebec and uncovered several reasons for this harsh reality.
The women interviewed for this study revealed the reasons they were fearful of the justice system. These include a lack of trust and the fear of not being believed; the perception that the safety of victims cannot be guaranteed throughout the process; and the influence of comments made by justice system stakeholders and the women's friends and families, who, according to studies, express doubts about the women's ability to navigate the justice system.
From the outset, the women are clearly told that they may not be able to see the process through and that it will be very difficult. In short, many obstacles are placed in their way from the beginning.
Some of the other reasons that came up include the need to take care of themselves first and to manage everyday life in the wake of sexual violence; the anticipation of the consequences of the legal process on the women and those around them; a lack of information on the legal process; and the fact that women know that assailants or perpetrators of sexual violence will get fairly lenient sentences.
The study went even further. Women who had gone through the justice system spoke about the obstacles and issues they had faced, such as the dearth of knowledge about female victims of violence; the continued existence of bias; being made to feel guilty by people within the justice system; the feeling that violence against women is minimized because of the very common legal procedure of sentence bargaining, during which the Crown and the defence negotiate sentencing; a perception that the accused has more rights than the victim; and lengthy delays.
I encourage my colleagues to read this study. They can contact my office or just google it. This study helped me better understand what women face after experiencing sexual violence.
Bill C-3 is not a magic wand that will change everything all at once, nor will it single-handedly change the statistics, but I think judges are the cornerstone of our justice system. Canadian judges must have all the tools they need to deal with every possible situation. If we give judges access to sexual violence training and require new judges to take the training, the entire justice system will clearly be better off. I sincerely believe it is high time Canada took action on this issue.
To ensure a better understanding of sexual assault cases, a new law concerning judges' education just came into force in August 2020. Judges will be required to attend specific training provided by a judicial training institute. Amnesty International and SOS Viol, a victim support organization, have called this a major victory, saying: “This new law is a positive and important step in the right direction. It addresses one of our main concerns in the fight against rape and sexual violence in Belgium: the many gaps in the training of those on the front lines, particularly in the judiciary.”
In France, the training course on sexual violence created in 2016 is five days long and addresses relevant issues pertaining to this specific type of violence.
In England and Wales, a tracking system was implemented that requires Crown Court judges to take a specialized training course before being able to hear sexual violence cases.
After all these years of waiting and all of the opportunities that we have had to pass Ms. Ambrose's bill, it is time to finally take action and pass this bill so that it becomes a reality.
However, I heard the questions that were raised throughout today's debate and I know that this bill will apply only to judges appointed by the federal government.
Although it is an area of provincial jurisdiction, I want to say a few words about training for Quebec court judges because they are responsible for the majority of the province's sexual violence cases. The Quebec Court has a six-page training program, which provides a very good summary. The Quebec Court and the Quebec Judicial Council are responsible for this continuing education, which is an ethical obligation for these two institutions.
The Judicial Code of Ethics states that judges have an ethical obligation to acquire and foster the knowledge and skills they need to carry out their judicial functions. However, I had to read through until the fourth page of the document to learn that the Court of Quebec is working on a special project to give judges specialized training on preparing rulings. However, there is no mention of training on sexual violence there.
The very last page mentions training on the rule of law and also on the society in which these rules are applied. I quote:
With respect to sexual offences, the training deals primarily with the evolution of jurisprudence and legislation regarding the notion of “consent”, the admissibility of means of defence and the tests for ensuring that myths or stereotypes do not influence the assessment of the credibility of complainants.
Once again, the training is not mandatory—