House debate  Mr. Chair, as I have stated, I received a briefing in the course of events at which I was assured that we were taking all steps to meet our third party records application responsibilities. I am satisfied. I have offered to read a description of what the process was that was se

House debate  Mr. Chair, I point out that with respect to these documents, the judge upheld the claim of solicitor-client privilege. They are privileged documents. I dispute the premise the hon. member stated that we are not taking this seriously. I as minister take this matter very seriously

House debate  Mr. Chair, I thought I was quite clear in that answer. Again, as Minister of Justice, I have been satisfied that the government and the Department of Justice took this matter very seriously, that we put in place a process that would provide for the defence to have the widest pos

House debate  Mr. Chair, again, I am not going to comment on the veracity of any allegations that are made or the sources they came from. What I can say is that the process we envisaged and used in the justice department included email, personal devices and that sort of thing for those potenti

House debate  Mr. Chair, I will not comment on specific allegations or their veracity. What I can say is that the process we did set up was meant to include potentially all kinds of documents, including those contained on devices. I will also point out that the judge thanked us at the concl

House debate  Mr. Chair, I was referring to a briefing earlier on, and I want to correct the record, as it is being misconstrued in this regard. As I have said a number of times, this was an extraordinarily complex set of third-party documents that was requested, a large number, many of which

House debate  Mr. Chair, if you give me 10 minutes, I am willing to read the note that describes the whole process for the documents.

House debate  Mr. Chair, as I have stated, I am not going to make comments about the actual proceedings of the case in the past tense. It would be inappropriate for me to do that. There are always a lot of strategic moves that are made throughout the course of a trial. What I can say is that

House debate  Mr. Chair, once again I will not comment about the various back-and-forth details about the case. That was managed by the director of public prosecutions and the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, independently of the Government of Canada. Both the director of public prosecuti

House debate  Mr. Chair, the comment was taken completely out of context. I have no way of commenting on it, nor should I. The prosecution service and counsel on each side are going to undertake to defend their clients as best they can in the ordinary course of proceedings, requesting documen

House debate  Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her important question. As I have stated, we are committed to ensuring that Canada's criminal justice system meets the highest standards of equity and fairness. The Boudreault decision on December 14 found, as the member has pointed out, th

House debate  Mr. Chair, it is critically important that we co-operate. The administration of justice is, in a sense, a shared responsibility. For example, we name judges, while the provinces have the responsibility for administering the court system. It is the same thing with legal aid acros

House debate  Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her speech, her question and her work on the justice committee. The answer is fourfold. The first measure is law reform, and the hon. member has spoken at length about the changes brought forward in Bill C-75, which we feel will increase

House debate  Mr. Chair, once again, the honest answer is that I actually have no recollection whether I spoke to him or not.

House debate  Mr. Chair, as I said a number of times publicly, there is an extradition process that has been established in Canada in which the process will go through the court system. Ultimately, at the end of all legal proceedings, if there is an extradition order, it is up to the Minister