Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill C-11, the military justice system modernization act. In short, the bill would amend the National Defence Act by removing investigative and prosecutorial jurisdiction in respect of sexual offences from the code of service discipline and would transfer such jurisdiction to civilian authorities on an exclusive basis to the extent that such offences are alleged to have arisen within Canada.
The legislation would implement recommendation 5 of the report of Madam Justice Deschamps, in which she undertook an external review of sexual misconduct and sexual harassment within the Canadian Armed Forces. Recommendation 5 is the only recommendation that requires a legislative change. I would note that the report of Madam Justice Deschamps was issued all the way back in March 2015. The government of the day, the Harper Conservative government, committed to implementing all 10 recommendations of the Deschamps report.
Of course shortly thereafter, there was a change of government. There was the election of the Liberals, and nothing was done. It is quite rich to see members across the way patting themselves on the back for introducing the legislation, because if in fact the legislation is the answer to addressing very real issues and challenges within the Canadian Armed Forces with respect to dealing with allegations of sexual assault and sexual misconduct, then the Liberals have a lot to answer for, because it has taken them a full 10 years in government to finally introduce the legislation. However, I digress.
With respect to the substance of the bill, it would transfer jurisdiction from the code of service discipline to civilian authorities with respect to the investigation and prosecution of offences of a sexual nature within the Canadian Armed Forces. By way of background, I will say that the purpose of the code of service discipline is to maintain discipline, efficiency and morale within the Canadian Armed Forces. That broad proposition has been recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada in the 1992 Généreux decision and the more recent 2019 Stillman decision, and it is stated in section 55 of the National Defence Act.
Conservatives stand with victims first and foremost, and it is on that basis that we will be supporting the legislation at second reading. That being said, I would submit that the bill warrants careful scrutiny when it is studied at committee. The legislation essentially stands for the proposition that the code of service discipline, the military justice system, is not fit for purpose, is not suitable and cannot be trusted to investigate offences of sexual assault and other sexual misconduct. That is the essence of the bill, whether the government would characterize it in that fashion or not.
It begs the question then, if that is so, what about other serious offences? The code of service discipline, after all, would apply to all other criminal offences within the Canadian Armed Forces; indeed, it would continue to apply to offences of a sexual nature where those offences are alleged to have arisen outside Canada. If concurrent jurisdiction of the code of service discipline is objectionable in the case of sexual offences, then should it not perhaps be considered objectionable in the case of other offences?
I say that in recognition of the uniqueness of sexual assault cases in terms of investigating and prosecuting them. I recognize that, but it does raise questions about whether the bill is a piecemeal or ad hoc approach to reform rather than a fully thought-out and comprehensive set of reforms to our military justice system.
I would, furthermore, ask what evidence there is that simply transferring the cases to the civilian authorities serves victims. I say that because there was a directive to the Minister of National Defence issued in November of 2021 to begin transferring sexual offence cases to the civilian authorities. I want to know to what extent that is working as intended. To what degree are these cases being prosecuted? What has been the rate of conviction? How are historical cases of sexual assault being proceeded with now that they fall within the jurisdiction of the civilian authorities? I understand there have been some challenges in that regard.
What about the extent to which prosecutions have been stayed because of a very real and serious backlog in our court system, having regard for the Jordan decision, which imposes a very strict timeline between the laying of charges and the conclusion of a trial, failing which there is a presumption of unreasonable delay and a stay of proceedings? I understand that this too has been an issue.
We need answers to these questions. We also need to better understand to what extent the bill would improve the maintenance of discipline, efficiency and morale within the Canadian Armed Forces now that the investigations of sexual assaults and sexual misconduct would largely fall outside of the chain of command and be transferred to the civilian authorities, absent a clear chain of responsibilities. To what degree would that impact how occurrences of sexual misconduct are handled, and to what extent might that put certain victims of sexual assault in a more vulnerable position? These are some of the many questions that need to be addressed.
I know that my Conservative colleagues on the national defence committee look forward to working with members on all sides of the House to hear from as many witnesses as possible, first and foremost from victims of sexual assault but also from actors within the military justice system, members of the Canadian Armed Forces, victims groups and so on. We need to have a thorough study to deal with some of the complexities that have to be addressed in what is a well-intentioned bill, the objective of which I support.
We need to get it right, first and foremost for victims of sexual assault within the Canadian Armed Forces who deserve a safe workplace, and we need to ensure, when it comes to the Canadian Armed Forces, that there is an improvement in the maintenance of discipline, efficiency and morale.