Justice committee  Yes, that's correct.

Justice committee  You're actually referring to a very broad range of acts. Here we're focusing on the most serious situations and the most obvious cases of violence and excessive frustration. However, we also see that section 43 is still applied to acts that, as the Supreme Court has correctly held, are insignificant or transitory.

Justice committee  I will obviously be offering no legal advice this morning. However, I can tell you about what we're hearing in the various tribunals. First of all, there's the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, which we're discussing today. It's one of the tribunals. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has also issued numerous recommendations on the subject over the years.

Justice committee  The United Nations is also considering section 43. Despite the way the Supreme Court construed it in 2004, as we know, and even though the UN has spoken on the subject, the fact remains that this section refers to corporal punishment. There is of course the somewhat separate aspect that you're referring to: the use of force for other reasons.

Justice committee  Yes, that's it. That's what the Supreme Court said in Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law: Outbursts of anger and frustration and excessive force are among the things that are excluded from the application of section 43.

Justice committee  No, there are no similar cases where the defence provided under section 43 was selected and applied. However, there have been situations in which the defence claimed that the force used wasn't that excessive. I can even use the example that you cited and that occurred in the Ontario Court of Justice in December 2023.

Justice committee  As far as I know, no.

Justice committee  I'd just like to add that what we're seeing in judgments involving the application of section 43 across the country are alternative grounds. In other words, section 43 will be used as a main defence. If that doesn't work, a party may then consider that the de minimis defence may apply in the circumstances.

Justice committee  Yes, that's it. In addition to that, there are the contradictory versions and factors that will be submitted to the court. For example, one witness may say he or she barely grazed the student's shoulder in removing the student from the classroom, whereas other witnesses will say that the student was callously escorted from the room in a fit of anger.

Justice committee  The report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission solely concerns indigenous children at the residential schools. The issue wasn't explored more broadly.

Justice committee  It was 2015.

Justice committee  The report focuses solely on the physical and sexual abuse that occurred at institutions. So it isn't about the residential schools per se; the 2015 report addresses all matters pertaining to physical and sexual abuse.

Justice committee  It's essentially a report that establishes all the physical and sexual abuse that indigenous people have suffered in the past. So the report is quite broad in scope, and its call to action number 6 concerns physical and sexual abuse.

Justice committee  Call to action number 6 may be understood as a call for the government to repeal section 43 of the Criminal Code because it permits corporal punishment, as my colleague said, and such punishment is still permitted in schools and elsewhere as a result of the Supreme Court judgment in Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law.

Justice committee  Yes. We're talking about the abuse that was inflicted on indigenous children by teachers and guardians at the residential schools.