Skip to content

LCJC - Standing Committee

Legal and Constitutional Affairs

Past Session: Past Session:
41-2 41st Parliament, 2nd Session (October 16, 2013 - August 2, 2015)
Select a different session
 

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Legal and Constitutional Affairs

Issue 1 -  Second Report of the Committee

Thursday, November 28, 2013

The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs has the honour to table its

SECOND REPORT

Your committee, to which was referred the subject-matter of those elements contained in Division 19 of Part 3 of Bill C-4, A second act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 21, 2013 and other measures, has, in obedience to its order of reference of Tuesday, November 5, 2013, examined the said subject-matter and now reports as follows:

Clauses 471 and 472 of Bill C-4 add two new sections to the Supreme Court Act in order to clarify the eligibility criteria for Supreme Court Justices. In effect, the new provisions indicate, ``for greater certainty,'' that a person is required to have been an advocate of at least 10 years' standing at the bar of a province in order to be appointed to the Supreme Court, but that person does not have to be a member of the relevant bar at the time of the appointment.

Between November 21 and November 27, 2013, the committee held two meetings comprising approximately 4 hours on this study. The committee heard testimony from the Honourable Peter MacKay, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada Michel Bastarache and three law professors: Benoit Pelletier, Paul Daly and Carissima Mathen. The committee also received written submissions from the Government of Québec and from law professor Adam Dodek.

Testimony from these witnesses touched on the following issues:

  • the interpretation (nature and purpose) of sections 5 and 6 of the Supreme Court Act;

  • the appointment of a member of the Federal Court or Federal Court of Appeal to one of Quebec's three seats on the Supreme Court of Canada;

  • the impact of clauses 471 and 472 of Bill C-4, which purport to clarify the Supreme Court Act;

  • whether a constitutional amendment is required to make such changes;

  • the nature of declaratory provisions such as clauses 471 and 472; and

  • the implications of the Government of Canada's reference of the subject-matter of Division 19 of Part 3 of Bill C-4 to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Canadian Bar Association, the Barreau du Québec and former Supreme Court Justice Ian Binnie declined our invitation to appear during the committee's public hearings.

Respectfully submitted,

BOB RUNCIMAN

Chair

Back to top