House of Commons Hansard #34 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was victims.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Military Justice System Modernization Act Second reading of Bill C-11. The bill modernizes the military justice system, aiming to improve safety and trust within the Canadian Armed Forces. It removes jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual offences committed in Canada from military courts, implements recommendations from the Arbour and Fish reports to strengthen independence for key roles, and expands victim support. Conservatives raise concerns about civilian court capacity and potential political interference. The Bloc Québécois supports the bill's advancement but criticizes the years of governmental inaction. 48300 words, 6 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Canada Labour Code First reading of Bill C-247. The bill amends the Canada Labour Code to repeal section 107, aiming to prevent governments from forcing striking workers back to work and uphold the right to strike and free collective bargaining. 200 words.
Time Change Act First reading of Bill C-248. The bill proposes holding a pan-Canadian conference with provinces, territories, and Indigenous leaders to discuss ending the practice of changing clocks and establishing one fixed time across Canada. 200 words.
Procedure and House AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
The Speaker Francis Scarpaleggia
All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay.
There being no dissenting voice, it is agreed.
The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.
(Motion agreed to)
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-11, An Act to amend the National Defence Act and other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Fraser Tolmie Conservative Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK
Mr. Speaker, I will say that my time is not being split, because it is already split, and I am the second half. I say that because I am torn and split over the bill, so I will be sharing my thoughts and comments over the next few minutes. I have been asked to speak to Bill C-11 given the veterans affairs committee's work on MST, military sexual trauma, in the last Parliament.
I am proud to speak to this important issue, but I wish it was not necessary. During that study, the veterans affairs committee heard countless first-hand accounts of how terrible military sexual trauma can be and the lasting effects it can have on a person and their family.
First, we have to solemnly thank all the survivors who came forward to bravely share their stories and pursue claims despite all the challenges thrown in their way. Sadly, the VAC claims process still places a considerable burden of proof on survivors, sometimes forcing survivors to recount their horrific stories several times, and from what I have heard, time and time again.
Many witnesses shared their difficulties, delays and ongoing barriers when seeking help for MST-related health impacts. This is extremely important to note. MST survivors often experience lasting mental health effects, such as PTSD, depression and substance abuse, compounded by physical health problems and challenges in interpersonal relationships.
Many women came forward with heartbreaking accounts, but they had the courage to demand change and accountability from the system they were in. I would like to share some quotes from survivors who shared their accounts with our committee: “I came forward because I could not live with the weight of silence anymore. The trauma followed me home, and VAC made the process so hard that I nearly gave up.” That is not a lone comment.
Another comment was, “Being believed matters. In the military, the burden of proof is too heavy. My entire story was put on trial again when I applied for support from Veterans Affairs.”
Another witness shared this: “There is strength in telling our stories, but it's exhausting to relive the trauma with each new bureaucratic step. We need a system that listens the first time.”
Another comment from a witness was, “When I tried to access help, I felt isolated and invisible. Services were not designed for people like me—they didn't understand what I had lived through.”
These are heartbreaking testimonies that have come forward. VAC needs to train case managers in trauma. Too often, I was confronted by disbelief or ignorance when explaining the reality and the complexity of sexual trauma. The veterans affairs committee dealt with and listened to many witnesses. It was heartbreaking. This committee is doing good work, and we are also going to be hearing about veterans who have committed suicide and how we can prevent this for our veterans community, so it is not an easy committee to be on.
One comment that really hit home to me was, “All I ever wanted was recognition, support, and to be treated like my experiences mattered. MST ended my career and changed my life in every way.”
We need to be there for victims during their time in service and after their time in service.
I am someone who has served and a father of two young girls, and this issue hits extremely close to home. I can only hope that by the time my children are adults, parliamentarians will not still be looking at ways to fix these ongoing crises. Sadly, the current bill would not fix them.
First, I will say clearly to anyone watching that the Liberals are not serious about this issue. If they were, they would not have tabled Bill C-66 mere months before the last election, but they did. If they were serious, they would not have allowed it to die on the Order Paper without real debate. If they were serious, they would have listened to the experts explain the legislation's problems instead of copying and pasting the legislation into Bill C-11, the bill we are debating today. Frankly, Liberals cannot be trusted to stop sexual assault within the CAF. They constantly choose soft-on-crime policies instead of advocating for victims. We have seen that today in the House. Victims seem to be ignored, but those who commit the crimes seem to get away with it.
Those of us on this side of the House believe we must continue to address sexual misconduct, discrimination, racism and other forms of harassment. All military members deserve to have a safe and respectful workplace. All victims of military sexual misconduct deserve timely justice. The Harper government accepted all recommendations from the Deschamps report to eliminate all forms of sexual harassment in the CAF. After a decade of the Liberal government and two more reports from Supreme Court justices, victims of military sexual misconduct are still no closer to having their cases dealt with properly.
Sadly, parts of Bill C-11 would simply open the door to potential political interference and partisan appointments. First, the bill would give increased power to the Minister of National Defence to issue guidelines with respect to prosecutions. Second, the director of military prosecution, the director of defence counsel services and the provost marshal general would be appointed by the Governor in Council. Canadians are worried about political interference. Given the wide-ranging issues with the ways former defence minister Sajjan handled sexual misconduct cases in 2021, this is for good reason.
For over half a year, Justin Trudeau and former minister Sajjan continually covered up information on sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces. Trudeau's team went to great lengths to block investigations and hide the truth from Canadians. For months in 2021, he orchestrated a cover-up to hide the fact that his top aide, Katie Telford, and former minister Sajjan had direct knowledge of the sexual misconduct allegation against the then chief of the defence staff.
In a statement on the report conducted by the status of women committee in 2021, Conservatives said, “it's become abundantly clear that there has been a lack of leadership” by the defence minister on the issue of sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces. Despite repeated problems, including handling of sexual misconduct allegations, then prime minister Trudeau left former defence minister Sajjan as the minister until after the next election. When sexual misconduct was studied at the national defence committee in 2021, the Liberals filibustered for weeks and then called an election before the committee was able to produce a report. Four Liberal MPs who participated in the filibuster are elected today. Let us be clear that Liberal political interference is not limited to national defence. Liberals have a long and proud history of it.
We have seen time and time again how the Liberals have involved themselves in military decisions when they should have stayed out. This means that parliamentarians who are veterans need to read and go through the bill in committee.
Bill C-11 Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is so wrong in so many ways that I do not know where to begin. Maybe the member should realize that when we take a look at Justice Arbour's 48 recommendations, the goal is to achieve success on 47 of those before the end of this year. Many of the things the legislation would put in place through criminal law are already being administered, in part because of the government's drive to move and shift from military to civil court processes.
The member is just wrong on so many points. Will the Conservative brain thrust recognize that if Conservatives want that 48th recommendation done before the end of this year, they need to get onside? They have to allow the legislation to go to committee. This irresponsible and destructive force, which is better known as the Conservative Party, here on the floor of the House of Commons is the only—
Fraser Tolmie Conservative Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK
Mr. Speaker, the destructive force is the Liberal government and the way it has treated our military and veterans. I cannot believe what I just heard. It is nothing but white noise from members of this party. They have done nothing for our military or our veterans.
You should be ashamed.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater
Order, please.
I remind the member to go through the Chair.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Joliette—Manawan.
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette—Manawan, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague whether such an amendment should have been made years ago. Various allegations were made, but little action followed, and the previous government did not really make a proactive effort to respond to these allegations.
Fraser Tolmie Conservative Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK
Mr. Speaker, I have worked with the Bloc at the veterans affairs committee, and we have seen nothing but time-wasting by the Liberal Party rather than actually doing anything solid for our veterans. It is shameful. I have seen a vet from Quebec come to the veterans affairs committee with a suitcase of claims that have never been addressed. That is exactly what the Liberal Party has: suitcases of claims with nothing done. It is a shame.
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our hon. colleague for his service to our country. I know this member very well, and I know this is near and dear to him because of the time he served on the committee. He listened to the testimonies of the victims, as I have. Our hon. colleague Is a veteran, a committee member and a friend and colleague to some of these victims; I want to know just how important this is to him, his friends and his former colleagues.
Fraser Tolmie Conservative Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK
Mr. Speaker, I have probably been a little heated in some of my responses today because I am passionate. I am passionate about the military. I am passionate about how it has been neglected, and we need to actually support our military and properly equip it. I am also passionate about our veterans, who need proper care. They have served and have been willing to put their lives on the line. I want to be clear: As a vet, I was never in a position to put my life on the line when I was serving. I served on a small scale, but, honestly, I know people who have put their lives on the line, and they deserve better.
Jill McKnight LiberalMinister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Rivière-du-Nord. I am still learning French, so I will give my comments in English.
I wish to acknowledge my colleague for his service and thank him for his service to Canada.
On June 13, as the newly appointed Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, I had the profound honour of meeting a delegation of remarkable women veterans. They shared with me deeply personal stories of service, strength and the unique challenges they have faced as women veterans. Their voices were clear: Women veterans want to be recognized not only for their service but also for the distinct barriers they continue to face in access to care and support. They spoke of the power of peer connection, the need for trauma-informed systems and their steadfast hope that the Canadian Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Canada will continue to evolve and grow in their supports for women. Their courage, advocacy and vision have shaped my conviction and are the reason I rise to speak today to underscore the importance of Bill C-11, the military justice system modernization act.
This legislation would be a significant step forward in addressing a deeply troubling aspect of military service, which is military sexual trauma, also known as MST. MST is a serious concern, with one in four women in our Armed Forces having experienced it in some form. It encompasses sexual harassment, assault and other forms of sexual violence that occur during military service. Trauma from these experiences can have lasting and devastating effects on our CAF members and veterans. It affects their short- and long-term mental health, their emotional well-being, personal relationships and overall quality of life.
To fully understand the relevance of Bill C-11, it is important to first understand the connection between MST and post-traumatic stress disorder. Research has demonstrated that women in service, who are more likely to experience MST, are disproportionately affected by PTSD. The trauma from such experiences, including MST, often leads to a range of challenges, including but not limited to depression, anxiety and other mental health concerns. Veterans Affairs Canada recognizes that PTSD is not just a personal issue. It is a systemic one that has affected many people who have dedicated their lives to serving our country. Additionally, the effects of MST extend beyond the individual, impacting their families, relationships and communities. It can also lead to significant barriers in accessing the support and services they need. As a department committed to the well-being of our veterans, Veterans Affairs Canada understands the urgency of addressing these challenges comprehensively and effectively.
Upon the resumption of Parliament last month, I had a very informative and insightful conversation with Senator Rebecca Patterson, who is a veteran and a champion for members of the Canadian Armed Forces, veterans and their families. We discussed the complexities of MST and the urgent progress still needed.
Bill C-11 would recognize and respond to the unique needs of survivors of military sexual trauma. For too long, survivors of MST have faced insurmountable barriers to obtaining justice and holding perpetrators accountable for their actions. We need to improve transparency and accountability within the military justice system and provide a mechanism for survivors to file complaints in a manner that respects their dignity and ensures their voices are heard. This bill would establish a clear framework for investigating and responding to allegations of sexual misconduct while also promoting an environment of accountability. In doing so, the bill would not only support survivors in their quest for justice, but also send a strong message that such behaviour will not be tolerated in the military.
Another pivotal element of Bill C-11 would be a much-needed culture change within the military and veteran communities. Addressing MST effectively requires a shift in attitudes and behaviours at all levels of the military establishment. It is essential that supports and services are both readily available and easily accessible to those who need them.
Equally important is ensuring that victims know where safe spaces exist for them to come forward to share their experiences. Veterans Affairs Canada recognizes that changing entrenched cultural norms is not easily achieved, but it remains essential for creating a safe and supportive environment for all service members.
Bill C-11's focus on prevention and cultural change is a proactive step toward ensuring that future generations of military personnel are protected from such trauma. By removing jurisdiction over sexual offences from the military chain of command, the bill could address the isolation, stigma and fear of reprisal that have silenced survivors for decades.
I extend my appreciation to my colleague the Minister of National Defence and his department for their leadership and diligence in putting forward this legislation. The collaboration between our departments has been pivotal in shaping a response to MST that is both comprehensive and compassionate.
Our government's commitment to improving the military justice system, strengthening support for survivors and fostering a culture of respect and accountability remains unwavering. Its proactive approach and dedication to this cause will be instrumental in the passage of Bill C-11.
Together, the minister and I, as well as our departments, are committed to ensuring the well-being of those who serve and have served our country. My department actively collaborates with the Department of National Defence's sexual misconduct support and resource centre to develop additional supports for individuals affected by military sexual trauma. The resource centre's peer support program is a critical initiative that offers compassionate, trauma-informed support to veterans who have experienced MST.
By connecting survivors with trained peers who understand their unique challenges, this program fosters healing, resilience and a renewed sense of community. It is a meaningful step toward ensuring that no veteran faces their recovery journey alone. In addition to the work within our government, we must also continue to build and strengthen partnerships with other organizations and stakeholders to ensure a coordinated and comprehensive approach. This includes collaborating with military leadership, advocacy groups, mental health professionals and survivors to create a support system that meaningfully improves outcomes.
While Bill C-11 represents a significant step forward, the work does not end here. We must remain vigilant in our efforts to support survivors, hold perpetrators accountable and promote a culture of respect and safety within the military and within veteran communities.
Veterans Affairs Canada is committed to continuing this work, ensuring that the provisions of Bill C-11 are implemented effectively, and that we remain responsive to the evolving needs of our veterans.
By passing Bill C-11, we would take an essential step toward addressing military sexual trauma with the urgency, care and compassion it merits. By working collaboratively with the Department of National Defence and other key partners, we will create a safer and more supportive environment for all those who have worn the uniform and ensure that their sacrifices are honoured by giving them the respect and care they deserve.
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
Mr. Speaker, I was going to ask a question about Bill C-11 today, but the minister brought up a number of points regarding veterans, Canadian Armed Forces members and personnel, their service and the PTSD related to their service.
In 2017, I passed a bill here in the House, Bill C-211, which made Canada the first country in the world to develop a national framework with respect to post-traumatic stress disorder. I had assistance from all sides of the House to do that. It has been eight years, and we have not received an update from any of the ministries responsible for that.
Would the minister commit to giving us an update on where they are with requirements that were laid out within Bill C-211, the legislation that passed in 2017, that deals specifically with post-traumatic stress disorder, our members and our veterans, through their service?
Jill McKnight Liberal Delta, BC
Mr. Speaker, Veterans Affairs Canada takes the mental health of our veterans and the supports for them very seriously, and it will continue to advance the opportunities that we have available to support them. That included bringing in access to mental health supports, which was available for a two-year period with no waiting period, so that we could ensure that veterans got the help and support they needed right away without waiting on paperwork.
I would be happy to follow up with my colleague to discuss other steps in the works right now.
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech and for offering to share her time with me.
That said, I would like to know whether she can tell us why roughly 10 years came and went between the day that Justice Marie Deschamps's first report was released and the day that this bill was tabled. We know that there was a number of earlier reports and bills, but it seems rather extreme to me that it should take 10 years to come up with a bill like this.
Can my colleague explain that time lapse?
Jill McKnight Liberal Delta, BC
Mr. Speaker, many things happened in the previous 10-year period, and I would concur that there is still more work to be done. Our government has accepted all of Justice Arbour's recommendations and intends to implement them.
In December 2022, the former minister of national defence presented a report to Parliament outlining the steps the government would take in response to each of the 48 recommendations, and we have been working on implementing them. Recommendation number five is the only recommendation that can exclusively be implemented through legislation, which is why it is the only Arbour recommendation addressed in this particular bill. The remaining 47 recommendations are being addressed through other means. We are taking steps to make the changes now, so we can improve the response for veterans.
Bill C-11 Military Justice System Modernization ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the minister referenced the 48 recommendations. We anticipate we will be able to complete 47 of those as early as before the end of this year. If we had a sense of co-operation in working with the opposition parties, we could pass Bill C-11, which would then mean we could hit the target of completing all 48 recommendations. Even though the bill puts it into law, I think it is important that we recognize that military sexual harassment is currently being deferred to the civilian court system. It is not that we are lagging behind, but this would allow us to put into law what is already, at least in part, being done.
Jill McKnight Liberal Delta, BC
Mr. Speaker, my colleague brings up an important point.
As was referenced in both his question and previous remarks, there is an opportunity, through the passage of Bill C-11, to be able to advance one of the recommendations, which then puts us on track to have all of the recommendations implemented by the end of this year. I think that is an incredibly important accomplishment that will move our ability to support our veterans and our service members forward in responding to military sexual trauma.
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, Bill C‑11 gives us something we have been hoping for for a long time, namely an opportunity to improve the military justice system. Acts of sexual misconduct have been widely reported in the media over the past few years, severely affecting the reputation of the Canadian Armed Forces and its leaders. Although I have not been able to find data on this, it goes without saying that the situation has also likely severely affected recruitment efforts, as well as morale among female military members.
This bill is almost the same as Bill C‑66, which died on the Order Paper in January when Parliament was prorogued and later dissolved, leading to the election in April.
Several former justices of the Supreme Court of Canada have already studied the issue and made recommendations. First, there was the Hon. Justice Marie Deschamps, who tabled her report on March 27, 2015. That was over 10 years ago. Then there was the Hon. Morris J. Fish, who tabled his in June 2021. That was the third independent review. It contained 107 recommendations, including one to review the process for appointing three key positions in the military justice system: the provost marshal, the director of military prosecutions and the director of defence counsel services. I think everyone can agree that, in a justice system, the judge, the prosecutor and the defence attorney are pretty important.
Justice Fish proposed better safeguards to protect these individuals from any pressure they might have been subjected to by the military hierarchy. Bill C‑11 addresses that recommendation, and we think it is a wise decision. However, we must remain vigilant to ensure that politicians do not interfere in the justice process, which desperately needs reforms. We must not get to a point where we get rid of one form of interference in favour of another.
As has been mentioned several times in the House, the appointment process in our common law courts justice system is often manipulated. For one, we have often heard about the infamous “Liberalist”. I hope that the “Liberalist”, or the Conservative list, if they are elected in the next election, will not become the tool for appointing judges to the courts that will have to judge or act as prosecutors in cases of sexual assault in the military.
Prior to Justice Fish, in 2003, the late Right Hon. Antonio Lamer, a retired former chief justice, also submitted a report containing 88 recommendations. In 2012, the Hon. Patrick LeSage, former chief justice of the Ontario Superior Court, also submitted a report, which contained 55 recommendations. Finally, there was the Hon. Louise Arbour, former justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, who, after pointing out that the exercise had already been done, tabled her report in October 2025, more than 10 years after her colleague Justice Deschamps.
We in the Bloc Québécois believe that it is time to take action. We intend to support this bill and hope that it comes into force quickly so that we can have a military justice system that reflects Quebec and Canadian society.
In a recent media interview, the hon. Minister of National Defence said that victims need to have the confidence that the system is transparent and predictable and that they have the support that they need to come forward and to reveal what has happened to them. Not surprisingly, we agree. That is how it needs to be.
The armed forces as we knew them a century ago have given way to an army that is more open to the realities of our society. While the presence of women in the military was once an exception, even an anachronism, today it is the norm for about 15% to 20% of armed forces members. However, the organization of the armed forces has to adjust to this reality. Every member of our armed forces must feel comfortable and fully able to provide the services they are called upon to provide.
As I was saying, Bill C-11 will make it possible to modify the appointment process so it is no longer hierarchical. The following appointments will now be made by the governor general in council, at the recommendation of the Minister of Defence: the Canadian Forces provost marshal, the director of military prosecutions and the director of defence counsel services. As I was saying earlier, this was among Justice Fish's recommendations, which were made a long time ago. Now it is in Bill C‑11, which is a good thing.
Bill C‑11 also proposes to remove the military courts' jurisdiction to try individuals for Criminal Code sexual offences. This is very important.
Some troubling situations have surfaced in recent years. We need only think of the case of General Jonathan Vance. He had been the focus of allegations of sexual misconduct long before the Conservative government decided to appoint him chief of the defence staff in the summer of 2015. He was alleged to have committed sexual misconduct, but the Conservatives did not see that as a problem and appointed him chief of the defence staff anyway. That seemed rather odd to us.
Then, in the fall of 2015, Justin Trudeau's Liberal government came to power. That government also did not bother removing General Vance from his position or do anything at all to limit the problems of sexual misconduct. On the contrary, allegations of sexual misconduct have escalated since 2015.
I will not go so far as to name every single person who has been the subject of allegations of misconduct. As a lawyer, I am aware that allegations of misconduct do not necessarily result in a guilty verdict. These individuals must be presumed innocent. That is fine, but it is still problematic at the social level. Society sees that people who lead the Canadian Armed Forces are the subject of repeated allegations of sexual assault or misconduct. Despite this, they are kept in their positions or even promoted. It makes no sense. I hope that Bill C‑11 will enable us to move beyond that era.
The bill also removes the military's power to investigate. Yes, that is obviously needed. Members will agree that a military investigator whose boss is accused of sexual assault or sexual misconduct is in no position to conduct an impartial and effective investigation.
I also want to talk about the process for appointing military judges. The pool is being expanded. The idea is that the person closest in rank is not necessarily the person who should be appointed and that the person could come from any military rank. There are individuals who have undergone training their entire military careers and who may be qualified to be appointed as court martial judges. In many cases, they would probably be better suited to the job than the highest-ranking officer who wanted to do it. This group is going to be expanded. That is good news for us.
The group of people who can file complaints will also be expanded. That is more good news. We must help victims emerge from the shadows and leave behind the era when allegations of sexual misconduct undermined the credibility of our military forces and the lives of women who served in the armed forces. I thank these women for helping to change the hierarchy and the way the armed forces operate. This is the best news we have had in a long time.
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. We work together in committee, and because he is a lawyer, I greatly appreciate his thoughts on this bill.
I am very pleased to learn that the Bloc Québécois will support this bill so that we can pass it quickly. I think that is very important.
Toward the end of his speech, my colleague talked about the importance of giving military personnel, especially women, confidence that the system in which they can file a complaint will be neutral and independent of the military process.
I would like my colleague to elaborate on that.
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question.
I understand very well why female members of the armed forces may have been quite hesitant to file a complaint against a superior for sexual assault or misconduct. I would have been too, knowing that the person conducting the investigation is largely subject to the orders of that individual and that the judge who will handle the case is also a member of the same military hierarchy. That would be pretty awkward. Ethically, it is rather obscene. It is just not right.
This situation must change so that women can feel comfortable filing complaints if they need to. That does not mean that all complaints will be founded, but at least there will be a serious complaint process so that they can be judged impartially.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech.
As the member for Hull—Aylmer so aptly said earlier, it is always good to have people familiar with the legal profession among us to share their perspective when we talk about legal matters.
Based on his professional and personal experience, I would like my colleague to talk to us about the possible advantages of a military court over a civilian court when trying cases involving the military. We know that military judges are also part of the institution they are judging, but military knowledge is why military courts exist.
Could my colleague share his thoughts on what the current bill proposes based on his experience with civil and criminal courts, particularly in Quebec, if I remember correctly?
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his excellent question. I have never testified before a court martial or a military court, so I cannot speak from experience.
That said, I am well aware that a judge who has to hear a case like this will need some guidance on what military life is like. However, that sort of thing is an everyday occurrence in the courts. A judge can hear a case involving engineering without being an engineer or a case involving medical malpractice without being a doctor.
Judges are used to having to familiarize themselves with a topic before handing down a ruling. In my opinion, the same will apply to cases involving the military. Judges will need to be informed and receive explanations from the lawyers involved in the case. Surely that is better and more effective.