44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 9, 2022 10:00AM
- Dec/9/22 10:22:23 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his speech. I always enjoy hearing him speak.
He went on at length about how Bill C‑9 will maintain the public trust, and he also talked about the separation of powers among the legislative, executive and judicial branches, which is just as important and is also maintained in Bill C‑9.
However, if there is one thing that makes us question that balance upon which the public trust relies, it is the judicial appointment process that precedes the potential removal of a judge from office, which one hopes would be a very infrequent occurrence.
I would like the minister to comment on the possibility of revising the appointment process to make it as non-partisan and transparent as possible, thereby bolstering public confidence in the judicial system.
139 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/9/22 10:23:12 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
In 2016, we established a non-partisan and transparent judicial appointment process that ensures exemplary quality and greater diversity among judges across Canada, including in Quebec. I can tell this House that the Barreau du Québec and Quebec lawyers are very pleased with the quality and diversity of the individuals appointed to the Quebec Superior Court.
We have already appointed 10 judges to the Quebec Superior Court this year, and we still have nine vacancies. The process is ongoing as we continue to fill these positions. I hope to have good news very soon.
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/9/22 10:55:15 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his interesting speech. The Bloc Québécois supports Bill C‑9, just as he does. The legal community has called for it and we commend this bill.
I would like to ask my colleague about the judicial appointment process. We know about the “Liberalist” scandal of the past few years. The government used its party's membership list to appoint judges. The government has said that it is no longer using the list, but the judicial appointment process still falls primarily to the government.
Does my hon. colleague agree with my party's position that there should be an all-party committee with greater transparency to appoint judges in order to increase trust in the process?
130 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/9/22 10:56:11 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I completely agree that the appointment of judges must be non-partisan altogether, whether or not that is done through a multi-party body that oversees the appointment of judges. I would take it a step further and say that politicians should not be involved in it at all. It should just be done on a very non-partisan basis, based on the lawyer's ability to be a good judge.
73 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/9/22 12:30:26 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the importance of the passage of the legislation. It is encouraging to see the type of unanimous support the legislation is receiving. That speaks well of the legislation itself. It also adds value to what I have made reference to in the past, which is public confidence in our judicial system and its independence.
Then the member started to talk about the appointment process, which has always been of keen interest to me. Where I disagree with the member is that she seems to think the appointments are political appointments when in fact they are not. I truly believe that about the judicial appointments that have been made to date.
The member mentioned that there are some other countries looking at it, and I expect there are a lot of countries looking at it. Can she cite a country with which she feels comfortable in the way a judge is appointed?
158 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/9/22 12:37:43 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Mr. Speaker, justice is important, but the appearance of justice is just as important. In Quebec, they say that the Supreme Court is like the leaning tower of Pisa. It always leans the same way: against Quebeckers.
I wonder if Quebeckers' declining confidence in the Supreme Court is due in large part to the secrecy and long-standing lack of transparency we see over and over in judicial appointments.
The noncommittal answers and wishy-washy suggestions we have been hearing from the government side lead me to believe that the Liberals do not really understand the magnitude of the task before them with respect to the appointment process.
Does my colleague think they are taking this seriously enough?
118 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/9/22 12:38:27 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Mr. Speaker, if, every time we talk about reviewing the judicial appointment process, the government basically systematically closes the door on it when all we want is for the issue to be examined or considered, then, of course, that will likely not help with transparency and the public's confidence in the justice system.
It is important to remember that judges rise through the courts. When a judge is appointed to a superior court, it is possible that they will one day serve on the Supreme Court, but it is rare for a Supreme Court justice to be appointed without first being appointed to a lower court.
Taking a bottom-up approach would involve starting with the appointment of judges in the superior courts of Quebec and the provinces, and reviewing that process from the bottom up would likely lead de facto to better confidence in the rest of the process and in the path that judges may take to the Supreme Court.
163 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/9/22 12:52:03 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and for the work that he did in committee that he mentioned in his speech. It is always interesting to see what arguments were presented there.
First, for the record, I want to confirm to my colleague that I am not suggesting that there are judges who are impartial because of the appointment process, but rather that we must ensure that the appointment process itself does not give the appearance of partiality.
With regard to the addition that he wanted to make to the bill of the possibility of appealing to the Federal Court of Canada, we know that not all appeals in the justice system are appeals as of right. Did my colleague want the appeal to the Federal Court to be an appeal as of right?
If so, would that not be opening the door to unduly lengthening the proceedings?
If he was talking about an appeal with leave, which is mostly the case at the Supreme Court, one must, at the very least, show that there are grounds for appeal, rather than just using this as purely dilatory measure.
191 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
