JUST Committee Report

Mr. Mike Wallace, M.P.
Chair, Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6

Dear Mr. Wallace:

In accordance with Standing Order 109 of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons and on behalf of the Government of Canada, I am pleased to present the government’s comprehensive response to the Statutory Review of Part XVII of the Criminal Code tabled in April 2014 by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights (the Committee).

Access to justice in both official languages is an issue for all Canadians. Canadians wish to live in a law-abiding society, with an equitable, accessible and fair justice system. In criminal matters, these principles mean that the courts must be able to function in English and in French, in accordance with the official language chosen by the accused for his or her trial. We must ensure that accused persons are not prejudiced by their choice of language.

Our government’s commitment to official languages is undeniable. In Canada's Economic Action Plan 2013, our government pledged to support official languages by maintaining funding dedicated to protecting, celebrating and reinforcing Canada’s linguistic duality. This commitment is reflected in the Roadmap for Canada’s Official Languages 2013-2018: Education, Immigration, Communities (the Roadmap).

The Department of Justice (the Department) has undertaken a number of measures to fulfill its commitment. First, under the Contraventions Act Fund, provinces and territories that have signed agreements with the Department to implement the federal contraventions regime can receive financial support, to cover judicial and extra judicial measures that guarantee language rights provided under Part XVII of the Criminal Code and Part IV of the Official Languages Act.

In addition, the Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Support Fund allocates resources to, amongst others, the provinces, territories, and official language minority communities, in order to support, in their respective spheres of activity, justice in both official languages. Provinces and territories can count on funding for language training programs that are specifically adapted to the needs of justice stakeholders, including Crown prosecutors, provincially-appointed criminal judges, and probation officers.

Furthermore, the Department has just made a contribution towards the creation of a National Consortium for Justice Training (the Consortium). The Consortium, made up of post-secondary teaching institutions, jurilinguistic centres and non-profit organizations that provide training services, also includes a representative from a provincial government and a judge appointed by the Canadian Council of Chief Judges (Provincial Courts). The Consortium will advise the government on the language training needs of provincial justice stakeholders. It will also develop collaborative approaches among its members in an effort to meet these training needs. Your recommendation regarding court interpreters and transcribers will be brought to their attention for consideration.

In addition to the grants and contributions programs, the government’s commitment to justice in both official languages is reflected in close cooperation between federal institutions such as the Department, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), and the Department of Public Safety.

For example, these institutions have created an Interdepartmental Network on Justice and Security, specifically dedicated to the issues faced by Canada’s Francophone and Anglophone minority communities.

At the intergovernmental level, the Government of Canada has adopted a fair and responsible approach based on collaboration with the provinces and territories. As you rightly recommend, it is essential that we continue in the same vein in order to ensure compliance with Part XVII of the Criminal Code and find solutions to the particular challenges associated with access to justice in both official languages.

To this end, the Department co-chairs a Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Access to Justice in Both Official Languages. In addition, other intergovernmental forums, such as the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Heads of Prosecution Committee, are addressing issues relating to the implementation of Part XVII as part of their respective mandates.

The study of the challenges associated with bilingual juries, which you rightly identify as a matter warranting special attention, is a good example of concerted action by government authorities. Both the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Access to Justice in Both Official Languages and the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Heads of Prosecution Committee are currently examining this matter. The Department and the PPSC are working together with their colleagues from the other jurisdictions on issues concerning bilingual juries.

Regarding the Committee’s recommendation that front-line police officers be better informed of an accused’s language rights, I will suggest to the Minister of Public Safety that the issue be raised with the RCMP, so that they in turn consider raising the issue with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. As for the suggested broadening of Part XVII of the Criminal Code to include bail hearings, the Department will propose to the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Access to Justice in Both Official Languages that they study the recommendation and raise it with the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Criminal Procedure Working Group for their additional examination.

Finally, in Recommendation 1, the Committee recommends that subsection 530(3) of the French version of the Criminal Code be amended by replacing “veille” with “doit veiller”. It is important to remember that the French legislative drafting standard, as required under section 11 of the Interpretation Act, is to express an obligation using the present indicative of the verb carrying the main meaning. This standard is different in English, and the standards are formulated to reflect the unique character of each language. This standard is applied in other federal acts, including the Official Languages Act, as well as in other sections of the Criminal Code. Furthermore, case law confirms that this provision is mandatory. For these reasons, the government is of the opinion that the proposed legislative amendment is not necessary.

I thank you, along with the members of the Standing Committee, for the work accomplished as part of this review. Please be assured that the government is taking your recommendations into consideration and is grateful for the potential solutions you have identified so as to help improve the implementation of Part XVII of the Criminal Code.

Yours sincerely,

Hon. Peter MacKay

Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada