Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Issue No. 24 - Evidence - March 9, 2017 (Afternoon Meeting)
OTTAWA, Thursday, March 9, 2017
The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs met this day at 3:31 p.m. to study matters pertaining to delays in Canada's criminal justice system.
Senator George Baker (Deputy Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Deputy Chair: Good afternoon and welcome, colleagues and invited guests. Earlier this year, the Senate authorized the committee to examine and report on matters pertaining to delays in Canada's criminal justice system and to review the roles of the Government of Canada and Parliament in addressing such delays.
We are pleased to have with us today the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada. Joining her at the table are, from the Department of Justice Canada, William Pentney, the Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, who appeared before this committee on Bill C-14 just a short time ago; and Mr. Donald Piragoff, the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Section, who has appeared before this committee and answered questions three times concerning the very subject matter we're dealing with here today, our committee study.
Members, we only have one hour today with the minister and her officials. I would ask you to keep your questions short and to the point. Minister, if you could please also do the same with your responses, that would be much appreciated. Of course, in your opening statement, we give you quite a period of time.
So here we are, and we will have a long list of senators who are wishing to ask questions. On that note, minister, the floor is yours.
Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Honourable senators, thank you for giving me the opportunity to come and clean up for my wonderful — I'm just kidding. I am very much appreciative of being able to come here and speak to you and be able to answer your questions in terms of delays in Canada's criminal justice system.
I want to begin — and you spoke to this, senator — by commending the committee for its excellent work on this issue and for its interim report that you released last summer. You have brought renewed attention and fresh perspectives to the pressing challenge of tackling delays in the criminal justice system.
I look forward to receiving your final report and its recommendations, which will support my work as Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada. It will undoubtedly be of great assistance to me in fulfilling my mandate- letter commitment to undertake modernization efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system.
The issue of delay in the justice system is, regrettably, not new. Long before the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in R v. Jordan, the government was working with the provinces and territories to address the critical issues of delays in the criminal justice system. In titling its interim report, the committee has it right: Delaying Justice Is Denying Justice.
Delay has a profound effect on everyone who is involved in the criminal justice system — victims of crime, who are revictimized by the sheer length of the court process, which prevents them from healing; accused persons, who must wait for their day in court, often detained in remand facilities waiting for determination of guilt or innocence; the committed criminal justice professionals, who are the lifeblood of our system, become discouraged when delays threaten to bring the law, which they serve, into disrepute; and, of course, Canadians, who rightfully expect that their criminal justice system will be one that is fair, efficient and consistent with our society's deeply held values as expressed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We can and must do more to reduce delays.
It is important to recognize, as this committee's interim report has, that the causes of delays are multiple and complex. Meaningfully addressing them will require leadership from not only the federal government but also the provinces and territories who are responsible for the administration of justice, as well as all stakeholders in the criminal justice system.
As articulated in Jordan, what is needed is a culture shift across the board, from all actors in the system. Victims and accused alike deserve timely trial, and, without this fundamental shift, change will not come.
In terms of this committee's interim report, I welcome the first recommendation calling on the Government of Canada to work with the provinces and territories and the judiciary to examine and implement best practices in case- flow management, to reduce the number of unnecessary appearances and adjournments and to ensure that criminal proceedings are dealt with more expeditiously. The government is already working closely with these counterparts to address this important recommendation.
I was fortunate to have the opportunity to meet with federal, provincial and territorial ministers responsible for justice and public safety in October. Delay featured prominently in our discussions, and ministers noted the importance of ongoing criminal justice review and agreed that continued information-sharing and best practices were in order.
I would also like to share with the committee that, since the Jordan decision was released, officials from my department have been engaged with their provincial and territorial colleagues to determine how the new framework is being implemented on the ground, as well as to identify emerging challenges and possible solutions to them.
As you know, a number of jurisdictions, including Quebec and Ontario, have recently announced specific measures to improve case completion times, which I welcome and support.
I am aware that a number of court decisions interpreting Jordan have been released and that the Supreme Court of Canada will be examining the issue again this spring. I will continue to monitor these cases very carefully. I absolutely understand the frustration and the heartbreak that results when a criminal case is stayed for delay.
As you know from your study, balancing the objective of expediency without compromising protection of the public or the integrity of the criminal justice system is extremely challenging. I am cognizant that proposed reforms to our criminal justice system should seek, to the maximum extent possible, to work in harmony with the objective of reducing delay.
This committee's interim report also addressed the federal responsibility for making timely judicial appointments to provincial and territorial superior courts. This is a responsibility that I take extremely seriously. In June and October of this year, I announced 39 judicial appointments in order to reduce urgent vacancies in courts.
Since then, I have taken steps to ensure a process for appointing judges that is transparent, accountable and promotes diversity on the bench. The newly reconstituted judicial advisory committees are unprecedented for their diversity, while women make up 70 per cent of all committee members. Judicial appointments are clearly being reviewed, and appointments will follow imminently.
I am pleased to be able to announce today the appointment of Tracy Clements to the Prince Edward Island Superior Court. She is the first jurist appointed pursuant to the new process, and there are more to come.
Changes to the appointments process will also help to address the lack of minority official language judges in some parts of the country by ensuring better information about second language abilities of applicants for judicial office and a clearer understanding of the needs of particular courts in terms of bilingual capacity.
As I mentioned, delays in the justice system cannot be traced to a single cause. Rather, they can only be meaningfully addressed through the efforts of multiple stakeholders on multiple fronts.
What may prove effective in one province or territory may miss the mark elsewhere. Indeed, we have seen evidence of a remarkable diversity in delay depending on the province or territory, which suggests there may be important lessons to be learned across jurisdictions. Superior Court judges are an important part of the criminal justice system, but it remains the case that provincially and territorially appointed judges adjudicate the vast majority of criminal cases, so cooperation with the provinces and territories for solutions to delays remains essential.
I share the committee's views on its third recommendation regarding the importance of innovation in the criminal justice system, including through the increased use of restorative justice and specialized courts, and also recognize the value in sharing best practices amongst those responsible for the criminal justice system.
As part of our ongoing review, we are working with our partners and key stakeholders and we are taking concrete steps at the federal level. Through Budget 2016, we increased funding for legal aid and for indigenous court worker services to ensure that all Canadians, including indigenous peoples, are properly supported during their interactions with the criminal justice system.
I also agree with the interim report's fourth recommendation calling for the Government of Canada to take the lead and invest greater resources in developing and deploying technological solutions to modernize criminal procedures. Indeed, with respect to efficiencies, my mandate letter directly states that I am to explore improved uses of information technology to make the system more efficient.
While there have been significant innovations of which the committee has taken note, particularly regarding electronic disclosure and video appearances in some jurisdictions, more needs to be done to leverage the potential productivity gains that information technology offers to criminal courts across the country. I am very interested in exploring how existing best practices can be scaled up and promoted, as well as considering new ideas that this committee may suggest to further build upon the recommendation in your final report.
In closing, I want to emphasize that I have heard loudly and clearly the message from this committee, the Supreme Court of Canada in its Jordan decision and from many others that excessive delay is one of the most pressing challenges facing our criminal justice system. I look forward to doing my part in showing leadership and bringing together stakeholders from across the country to tackle this important issue, which goes to the heart of the fairness and reputation of our criminal justice system.
Much work lies ahead, but I am confident that working in partnership with the provinces and territories, the judiciary and the legal profession, we will bring about changes that are necessary to ensure that our criminal justice system continues to serve Canadians and delivers both fair and timely results.
Mr. Chair and honourable senators, thank you again for the opportunity to be here today. I look forward to hearing from you and taking questions.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you, minister.
I am going to try, senators, to hold each person to approximately five minutes, and then back for a second round in the order in which the questions were asked in the first place.
Senator Batters: Minister, on Tuesday in Question Period, Prime Minister Trudeau was asked about Canada's criminal court delay crisis and about the scarcity of judicial appointments made by your government. In response, Prime Minister Trudeau said "the over 100 appointments we have made since we have come in.''
Minister, since you were sworn in, you have only made a small batch of 30-something judicial appointments. You have a staggering 62 Superior Court judicial vacancies right now. You dismantled all of the judicial advisory committees, and it took you 14 months to finally constitute only 7 out of 17 judicial advisory committees, and most remain empty. It also took you 10 months to even appoint the key position of judicial affairs adviser in your office.
Meanwhile, defence counsel have brought 800 stay applications. A few of the alarming cases that have recently been tossed out of court include two first-degree murder charges, a sexual assault of a three-year-old, and the serious physical assault of a two-week-old infant. This is a crisis.
When Prime Minister Trudeau referred to "the over 100 appointments made,'' he was definitely not referring to judicial appointments. If the Prime Minister was actually referring to all government-wide appointments made in the 16 months you've been in power, that is shocking and shows that your federal government is nearly paralyzed by inaction and delay.
So as one who sits at the cabinet table where these appointments are made, can you please verify that the Prime Minister was referring to government-wide appointments made in the last 16 months?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I certainly can speak to what our government has done with respect to judicial appointments.
In terms of the number of Superior Court justices that I have been able to appoint thus far, including the one today, we have appointed 40 Superior Court judges across the country. I've also had the opportunity to appoint 22 deputy judges. I am confident and very committed to ensuring that I fulfill my responsibility to appoint substantive, merit- based, diverse candidates to our Superior Court that reflect the diversity of our country.
In taking that responsibility into account, in terms of renewing the judicial appointments process, in terms of reconstituting the judicial advisory committees and the application process, it's with that in mind, and that objective of achieving diversity and substantive candidates, that we have inserted additional criteria and questions into the application process and have ensured there's diversity on our judicial advisory committees so we will get highly recommended candidates that I can choose from to appoint. The reason being, we want to be sure and take the time necessary to appoint judges across the country, and those judges are coming.
I'm very aware, senator, of the vacancies and I am very pleased to ensure that we will continue to appoint judges, and in addition to these seven judicial advisory committees that have been constituted, more will be constituted.
Senator Batters: To follow up, you didn't answer the question about what Prime Minister Trudeau was referring to when he referred to over 100 appointments. If you're not sure what he was referring to, could you please check into that and get back to this committee?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: Senator, I hear you on the question. I can't remember that, but I am very happy to follow up on that and get back to this committee.
Senator Batters: It was Tuesday this week and in response to Rona Ambrose's question.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: Thank you for your presentation, minister. I will refrain from listing the alleged criminals who have escaped justice because of court delays. I think it is shameful for Canada to have such a justice system in this day and age and not to act quickly in an attempt to remedy the situation.
Since we began studying this issue, we have heard from stakeholders who talked to us about meetings, problem identification and solutions. Despite all those discussions, criminals continue to escape justice. We have talked enough; now it's time for action.
Since you don't have the authority to fix everything, as some of the problems come under provincial responsibility, I would like to know whether you will task not another committee, but rather an individual, with resolving the issues under your jurisdiction. You could actually appoint an individual who would be responsible for the results.
I believe that enough committees have examined this matter. You know what to do. We must obtain results quickly. Are you prepared to make that commitment before our committee today?
[English]
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: As I indicated in my opening remarks, I share the concerns over delays in the criminal justice system. I further reflected that these delays are not new; they existed when we came in to government. I am firmly committed to undertaking a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform.
And as to your recommendation about working in a cooperative way with my colleagues in the provinces and territories, the administration of justice is a shared responsibility. We have taken and continue to take a number of steps in terms of the work that we are moving forward on, not only with respect to the appointment of judges to the superior courts, which is a federal responsibility. We continue to engage in discussions with our counterparts around bail reform. I'm looking at sentencing reform and the Criminal Code in terms of reviewing mandatory minimum penalties, which there is evidence that that leads to delays in the process, and further looking at what we can do to address the large number of administration of justice offences and greater technology. A lot of what has been reflected by the over 130 witness that this committee has heard is substantive work that is under way in terms of the work that we're doing within the department, with our colleagues across the country.
Again, I am very pleased that in our Budget 2016, $88 million was contributed to Legal Aid to assist unrepresented individuals in obtaining legal counsel as well as investing in the indigenous court workers program. We are doing some substantive work, senator, and we will continue to do so.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: I suggested that you appoint an individual if you have the opportunity to do so. When a person is appointed in a private company, they can be dismissed if you are not satisfied. That is why I made that suggestion. Thank you, minister.
[English]
The Deputy Chair: Did you wish to comment on that, Madam Minister?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I take my responsibility, senator, as the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General to do my best efforts and ensure that I continue to work with my colleagues. I deem myself to be that individual in terms of this effort.
Senator McIntyre: Thank you, minister, for being here today and answering our questions.
The Jordan decision is now the law of the land. There's no appeal from the decision of the Supreme Court. Hopefully, the court will revisit this issue in the near future. In the meantime, one of the big problems is governments and lower courts have no choice but to respond. They have to figure out ways to make sure some cases move faster.
Some provinces have decided to move faster by taking the bull by the horn and going straight to trial through direct indictment. On top of that, I understand that Manitoba's three Chief Justices and its Attorney General have written to you asking for a change to the code that would scrap preliminary inquiries, and Ontario's Attorney General has made the same request. Have you had a chance to meet with them? If not, when will you schedule an appointment with those people?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: In terms of your initial comments with respect to Jordan, I wanted to underscore what I said in my remarks and that the Cody case is moving forward in April and that will consider the framework that Jordan has laid out. We will be following that very closely.
I can confirm that I have received a letter from the Minister of Justice and Attorney General in Manitoba, Heather Stefanson, and the Chief Justices, as you indicated, requesting elimination of preliminary inquiries. I have also received an open letter from Attorney General Naqvi of Ontario expressing similar desires.
I will say that in terms of preliminary inquiries, there isn't consistency within all of the jurisdictions across the country in terms of whether or not they should be eliminated. There are often vigorous discussions and debates around that.
I will say, as I indicated in my direct conversation with Minister Stefanson, as well as Attorney General Naqvi, that I remain open to their suggestions. I further reflected to them that we are engaged in discussions internally among our officials and working groups that have and are considering preliminary inquiries. Again, I'm open to all suggestions that are brought forward. There needs to be some substantive work and data and evidence behind the elimination of preliminary inquiries. There are some promising practices that have come out of Ontario and Quebec looking at out- of-court disclosure practices.
I'm open to suggestions, but as of right now I'm going to await the report of the honourable senators around this table, as well as the report that will come from the working group of the federal-provincial-territorial committees.
The Deputy Chair: As well as the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in, as you mentioned, the Cody case. That's a case from Newfoundland and Labrador. I've read the trial and the Court of Appeal judgment, as some other senators have. That will address a lot of the questions that are asked about the Jordan decision. So you're absolutely correct on that April judgment.
You mentioned administration of justice offences. We're going to go to Senator White, and I hope he puts certain questions to you relating to that, because he's an expert in that area.
Senator White: Congratulations on today's appointment. I'm pleased to see someone leave the bench today.
On administration offences, we've had discussions around the success we've seen in British Columbia with impaired driving cases, and I know you're probably familiar with the fact that British Columbia used to have a huge backlog of impaired driving. By taking those offences, in essence, away from the criminal justice system, we've seen those cleared up.
Is the department looking at other offences, so instead of just dual procedure as indictable and summary conviction, but dual procedure as in criminal and noncriminal, which would allow us to remove from the criminal justice system, in some provinces, 25 per cent of the offences to be considered and instead put into administrative law?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: Certainly this formed some of the discussions around delays that I had with my counterparts back in October when we met. The administrative penalty approach in the Province of British Columbia, where I come from, was talked about; and I certainly support the efforts that provinces and territories undertake in terms of what British Columbia has done. I'm open to looking at other opportunities to do that.
In broad terms, administration of justice offences, as you probably know, constitute a huge number of cases in the criminal justice system, and I'm open to ensuring that we look at the efficiencies and effectiveness and solutions in terms of operational practices and what we can do to potentially lower the level of administration of justice offences to assist in improving the delays that exist.
Senator White: We had great witnesses this morning who talked about the Jordan case and opportunities we might have, I would argue at least, to correct what's occurred. There was a recommendation that came out of one of those witnesses, and people around the table appreciated it, and that was that we could make reference to the Supreme Court of Canada a piece of legislation that might be brought forward that identified specific remedies, rather than the one remedy we have, which is a stay, and see whether or not the Supreme Court thought that might be in line with the thinking they were trying to put forward. In their case, they were stuck with one case and one response.
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I look forward to reviewing the testimony of the witnesses this morning in terms of the backdrop for that conversation. I will say that in terms of the delays in the justice system and the consideration that the Supreme Court made in their reasons in Jordan, they focused on the need for a culture shift that would necessarily impact the actions of all of the actors in the criminal justice system.
I support the need to do my part to help find solutions. There's no silver bullet or one solution in terms of addressing delays. Again, I'll work with my colleagues in the provinces and territories where there are different realities in terms of what they're seeing based on the data that they have and best practices to ensure that we are as coordinated as possible, that we share the information in terms of those best practices. The commitment that I've made to all the attorneys general, and the reciprocal commitment they have made to me, is that we will continue to have these ongoing conversations to find the myriad of solutions to address all the delays.
Senator White: I will go back to my first question. I have had one police chief tell me the Jordan decision was like throwing out the murderer with the bath water. This decision is really impacting on our communities.
In relation to some of the backlog, 1985 was the first time we saw restorative justice put in place in Canada under the Young Offenders Act. We have seldom seen any government really focus on increasing funding for restorative justice and early intervention programs across the country. When we have, we have seen success. I can point to Yukon, Durham region, Alberta off and on and British Columbia under one specific justice. Overall, however, we have not seen a real commitment to restorative justice and early intervention models. Is there any movement to identify long- term funding over different courts to allow us to start targeting some of those models so we can see success? It has been over 30 years now.
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I'm really glad that you asked the question, senator. I have stated — and do state everywhere that I can — that I'm a firm believer and supporter in restorative justice measures. As the Minister of Justice, I am committed to working with my counterparts to explore alternative measures in terms of prevention and to find off- ramps for individuals who find themselves in the justice system, obviously having committed a crime but may be confronted with addictions issues or mental health issues. We need to recognize the overrepresentation of marginalized individuals in the justice system subject to issues like poverty.
I recognize there are really good practices that exist across the country. Our indigenous justice program supports a lot of those measures across the country by way of dollars, but I recognize there are also good restorative justice measures taking place in Nova Scotia.
I look forward, in this comprehensive review of the criminal justice system that's going back to the roots in terms of its principles, to looking at individuals in the justice system. That is to say, the 70 per cent of individuals for whom we can have a broader approach and provide the social supports that individuals need so that, as much as possible, we can ensure that their first visit into the justice system is their last and provide rehabilitation measures in appropriate circumstances where perhaps a victim can meet the offender and work in terms of sentencing circles, or otherwise, that would be appropriate.
The Deputy Chair: On a point of explanation, Senator White referenced some evidence we heard this morning before this committee. We heard a judge of the superior court here in camera and then we had constitutional experts before us, including Professor Hogg. Some of the senators do not agree with a stay of proceedings for very serious crimes like murder, sexual assault against children and so on, so we were searching for a means whereby that could be accomplished. This was a decision of the Supreme Court in 1987, and we differ from every other comparable nation in the world in that remedy under section 24(1) of the Charter. That's just for your information and a head's up. I'm not saying it will, but it may be referenced in the final report. It's a very important subject. Senators feel strongly about serious crimes and the fact that when someone is charged for murder or for very serious crimes, they would have it all erased as the only remedy.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: Good afternoon, minister. I wish you good luck, as Canada is facing a major challenge. As you know, the situation in Quebec is disastrous. Quebec ranks last among all the Canadian provinces in terms of delays.
For many victims of crime, that is a tragedy. According to Judge Fournier, about 50 per cent of criminal cases in Quebec may get thrown out. Released individuals will have no directive from the court not to come in contact with the victims, not to threaten them. It is a tragedy for victims to have to denounce an assailant only to realize that no trial will take place and that the criminal will not be given a directive to stay away from them, as the case has been dismissed. That is a tragedy for victims, minister.
I will repeat the sentence that jumped out at me in what the Prime Minister said a few days ago:
We must make sure that victims of sexual assault are treated appropriately in a justice system that will give them a fair trial and include real ramifications for assailants.
Two words are important in what he said: trial and ramifications.
The media rarely talk about what awaits victims of crime. They talk about criminals released without a trial, but rarely about trials where justice was not served. Quebec recently asked you to appoint two judges to the Court of Appeal and four or five to the Superior Court.
I have two questions for you. First, does the federal government intend to amend the Judges Act in order to increase the number of judges in Quebec? Second, is the federal government prepared to give Quebec the funding needed to hire those judges in the short term? I am asking because Quebec will have to put in $200 million over the next four years to try to resolve the situation.
[English]
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I acknowledge that I have similar concerns about delays and the impact that delays, potential stays, can have on victims of crime.
I am quite familiar, senator, with the situation in the province of Quebec. I work hard to ensure that I maintain an ongoing discussion with Minister Vallée, and I know that my officials are in contact with hers.
In terms of increasing the judicial complement, there have been requests from various jurisdictions, including Quebec, about increasing the judicial complement when a jurisdiction requests that. As you quite rightly note, if we were to do that, we would have to amend the Judge's Act. When we receive requests from jurisdictions around increasing the judicial complement, my officials engage with officials in the particular jurisdiction to put together a proposal or a plan and do the research necessary in order for me to be able to go to my colleagues around the cabinet table and make a well-thought through and researched request for additional judges in particular jurisdictions. That's something that happens in many jurisdictions.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: The situation in Quebec is urgent. I was looking at the list of trials that will soon be dismissed in that province. We are talking about trials for murder, sexual assault, and so on. Cases are thrown out every day. The situation in Quebec is really urgent.
I think that Quebec is making a tremendous effort by injecting $50 million a year over the next four years. I don't think we can afford to say that the task will be given to officials. Quebec is asking you to appoint two judges to the Court of Appeal and five judges for the trial of those cases. If not, the decision will only be made in four or five months and, in the meantime, hundreds of victims of crime will pay the price. The cabinet must make a decision quickly, minister, and Quebec is counting on you.
[English]
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: Senator, I just want to acknowledge your concerns. I share your concerns, and I will continue to ensure that I communicate and work with my counterpart. If my comments inferred I was putting it off to the officials, I am very much seized of this reality, and I look forward to, in the near future, ensuring that we sit down as federal and provincial and territorial colleagues perhaps and continue our discussions around delays, around how we can substantively address them and recognize the differences and the specific needs in each jurisdiction and work in a collaborative effort to try and address them.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you, minister. I misspoke a moment ago when I said we had an in camera meeting. It was actually an in-private meeting with Justice Hill, or as Mr. Piragoff would say, an ex parte hearing, for which there is no transcript available, but of course his record is on the record with us anyway.
[Translation]
Senator Dupuis: Minister, thank you for making yourself available to answer our questions. Two ideas in what you said jumped out at me: the need for leadership — and I completely agree with you on that — and cultural change, which is being debated in the Supreme Court.
There seem to be problems related to delays in criminal procedure. There is a procedural aspect in the delay issue. There is also another fundamental problem with the law, and that is remedy. I think the problem arises on both sides.
I am trying to understand what leadership role the federal Minister of Justice could play to give momentum to the cultural change, as the Supreme Court seems to have been in limbo on that issue for 30 years —
[English]
Stay of proceedings as the only remedy.
[Translation]
In that sense, the recent decision of the Supreme Court is also worrisome in the Jordan case, as it no longer seems to ensure —
[English]
Balance the social interest versus individual interests and constitutional rights.
[Translation]
The criminal justice world is a closed environment, which works very well on its own. How do you plan to achieve that cultural change, when many people doubt that it is possible in this environment?
[English]
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: Thank you for your comments and for that question. Your question about what my role is to promote or perhaps incite or encourage a culture shift is a question that I have been — certainly since the Jordan decision came out, but before that — considering in terms of my contribution, the leadership I can take in terms of assisting with delays in the criminal justice system, but more broadly looking at a review of the justice system to ensure public confidence — and there are many actors internally — in the justice system.
I know that I have a substantive leadership role to ensure that when I'm undertaking the comprehensive review of the criminal justice system that the Prime Minister tasked me with doing in my mandate letter, that I do that in a way that speaks to all of the different actors in the system, as you have in terms of your study. We've been engaging in round table discussions, hearing from victims of crime to police to prosecutors and judges and getting feedback and also working, as I said before, with provinces and territories. Not to reiterate the initiatives that we are undertaking, but there is an opportunity, and I will continue to embrace the opportunities that I have.
People listened to my voice in various forums that I can speak about the necessary changes that need to be made among all of the actors. It's my responsibility to deliver messages to ensure that we embrace the reality that there is no one solution but that we all have a role to play in order to find the solutions that will address delays and ensure public confidence in the criminal justice system.
It's incredibly important; it's urgent to address the efficiencies but also the effectiveness and increase that. It will require a bunch of actors, and I realize that I play an important role in that and am and will be committed to continue to work with all of the actors in the criminal justice system to ensure that we know what the best practices are, that we operationalize those best practices where we can, mindful of regional differences in the data that we collect, how to do that most appropriately, with the ultimate objective of achieving that culture shift. I wish it could happen more quickly, but I do, senator, acknowledge the substantive role I play in making that happen.
The Deputy Chair: Before we go to second round, I have one question, minister. I imagine you heard on the news that one province has now instructed its Crown prosecutors in provincial court to amend their normal procedures in that the numbers of counts would be reduced in an indictment and the amount of time spent on hybrid offences or summary offences be in some cases dropped in order to make room for the more serious cases provincially. This only happened a couple of days ago, but has the federal government decided to send out any directions to its federal Crown prosecutors across Canada to change their manual, or is it already in the manual that those sorts of actions by Crown prosecutors should be considered in the public interest?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I will refer this over to my deputy. I know that the public prosecutions have already issued directives, but I will let the deputy speak in more detail.
William F. Pentney, Deputy Minister and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice: As you said, senator, for many years, Crown attorneys have been guided by directions to consider the public interest. Some of Canada's most heinous criminals who have been convicted weren't convicted for all of the crimes they committed in part so that a process could get started and finished in a way that was manageable and would represent justice. Some of those victims never really felt, I would believe, that they got their day in court, but justice as we know it was done. Prosecutors have done that throughout.
Since the Jordan decision, the federal Director of Public Prosecutions has issued refined guidance to the lawyers within the federal prosecution service to remind them of the obligations that all prosecutors have carried since time immemorial in terms of considering the public interest, understanding the strength of their case, the nature of the evidence, the number of the charges, trying to ensure justice is done, but a part of doing justice means that process starts and finishes and that the more serious offences are fully dealt with.
Part of what you have seen in the data is we have too much and too little criminal justice. People who probably aren't properly drawn into the system for the full weight of the criminal law are taking up time in the court, and more serious cases are not getting the time they need in part because the resources are being devoted.
The federal prosecution service has issued updated directives. We are certainly looking, as are they and others, at the Alberta directives that have just been issued, but we know that all prosecution services have looked at their caseloads and looked at the directions guiding their prosecutors.
The Deputy Chair: Is this in public? Can the committee obtain a copy of those directives that you've talked about, duly issued?
Mr. Pentney: On the Director of Public Prosecutions site, it's available on the web now. It's a public document.
Senator Batters: Minister, you've stated that you want to continue discussing this matter with the provinces and you've referenced, as you did again today, the federal-provincial-territorial meeting that you had last fall with the Canadian provinces and territories, but that meeting happens every single year. There is nothing new about that. The two-day agendas they have at those meetings do contain many different topics. It's not a special meeting, as the Ontario Attorney General has suggested, just to deal with court delay.
Every time that I've seen you asked about this topic, you've provided generalities and haven't answered specifically what you're doing to help address the issue of criminal court delays. The causes of court delay, as you've said again today, are many and complex, but filling judicial vacancies is something solely within the purview of the federal government for superior court vacancies and you can act on this right now. You don't need to study it; you just need to act.
Can you please tell us specifically what you will do in the next six months to address this criminal court delay crisis?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: Senator, I recognize that the federal-provincial-territorial meetings happen once a year. That's not to say that there isn't an incredible amount of work that's taking place between the annual meetings between and among officials and certainly between and among me and my counterparts.
I have had conversations with Minister Naqvi from Ontario, and I've also had conversations with other attorneys general. There is great merit in having a Jordan-specific discussion with my counterparts. We certainly have been having those offline, but I am very open to that idea and I hope that can be arranged in the near future from my part.
In terms of specifics as to what we're doing with respect to the delays, again, I am very proud of the judicial appointment process that we've instituted and I will be making further appointments to the superior courts. I look forward to making those announcements in the near future.
We're looking at sentencing reform. We're looking at mandatory minimums, recognizing that mandatory minimum penalties contribute toward delays. We are studying the bail system with respect to how we can improve delays there and looking at administration of justice offences. We are supporting by way of dollars into legal aid and supporting indigenous peoples by way of indigenous court workers, looking at how we can continue to improve the technology — a recommendation from the interim report here. There are many things specifically that we are doing, and the fruit of the work that I have the benefit of doing with my counterparts across the country is going to continue to manifest itself in terms of addressing delays.
Senator Batters: You referred to our interim report that we released in the summertime. You've now had about six months or so to address that. You looked at many of the significant recommendations that we made. You referred to them in your opening statement. Specifically on those recommendations, other than the judicial appointments recommendation, what have you done already in the last six months since you have had the report and what in the next six months on those recommendations will you be doing?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: To reiterate what I just said in terms of what we've been doing, I will say that we've been working very hard and actively since we came into government some 16 months ago. There were substantive delays when we came in, and one of the reasons why the Prime Minister asked me to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system is because when we came in there were substantive challenges in existence.
Our government is committed to addressing them in a comprehensive way. In order to do that and do it thoughtfully and well, we need to take the time that is necessary to ensure that we're speaking with all of the stakeholders, all of the actors in the criminal justice system, to ensure that when we look to make reforms with respect to bail or administration of justice or looking at the Criminal Code and sentencing reform, that we're doing it in a way that's based on evidence and based on best practices. That's what I'm committed to doing, and that's what this government is committed to doing. A comprehensive review of the criminal justice system has not happened in decades. I'm very proud to be part of a government that is committed to doing that.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you, minister, and you've committed to looking at our final report and taking that into consideration immediately when we deliver it.
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: Absolutely.
Senator McIntyre: Minister, as you know, Canadians are disturbed with section 11(b) of the Charter, for which a breach calls for a stay of proceedings. Canadians understand that section 11(b) is a Charter right, but there are other rights, minister, such as victims' rights, societal rights. In looking at the scope and interests that play in the analysis of an accused's right to be tried within a reasonable period of time, it is obvious that those rights should be taken into consideration. Canadians just have the feeling that they are not taken into consideration by some courts, and by doing so I think it brings about erosion of the confidence Canadians have in the efficiency and fairness of our criminal justice system, and that is very sad. I would like to have your thoughts on that.
The Deputy Chair: Very short, minister, if you could.
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I, without question, share your desire to continue to ensure that the public has broad confidence in the criminal justice system. I will continue to be mindful of that for the entirety of the time that we're reviewing the criminal justice system. There are many actors within it. We must ensure that the rights of accused persons are protected. We also must ensure that respect and dignity are provided to victims of crime.
We need to ensure — and this speaks to the culture shift that has to occur that the Supreme Court spoke to — that there is balance, that we're taking a smart approach to justice, that we're ensuring that we protect victims of crime, that we provide and are mindful of the rights that accused persons have to be tried within a reasonable time, and that we ensure we are proceeding based on our values and based on ensuring that the rights of individuals are respected.
Senator Pratte: Minister, please allow me to be a little bit blunt. Listening to you, I see that you understand and obviously are aware of the problem, but you seem to be seeing this delay issue as a problem that you have all the time in the world to solve. As Senator Boisvenu has explained and I think what he says about Quebec is not unique to the province of Quebec, this is a crisis situation. I don't have the feeling, and maybe I'm totally unfair, but I don't sense that you see this as a crisis. You see this as a major problem, but you seem to have all the time in the world. Do you admit that this is a crisis and that we don't have all the time in the world and that decisions have to be taken urgently to try to address this crisis?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: Well, if I in any way inferred that I don't see this as an incredibly important issue in terms of delays in the justice system, I do. We are working very hard to ensure that we do our part to address these issues by way of the appointments of judges, by way of ensuring that we work with the provinces and territories that are responsible for the administration of justice, that we support their efforts and do our part. I and my officials are continuing to monitor the Jordan framework as it unfolds. I am very much looking forward to the report from this honourable table and looking forward to results of the Cody decision as it proceeds through the courts that could and will continue to provide guidance.
Senator Pratte: Will there be some results that people can see in the short term from all those studies?
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I am confident in the work that we have done thus far, the urgency of the work that we are doing in terms of being mindful of the delays, the concerns around the delays, the urgency of the delays, but we need to make sure that we are working with the provinces and territories and with other stakeholders to make the correct decisions to address these delays. I don't think that anyone around this table would disagree with the need to proceed as expeditiously as possible. That's what we will continue to do.
The Chair: We have two short questions left and hopefully some short answers.
Senator White: As a foundation to this, I did research in three provinces a few years ago about proportionality. We saw that 25 per cent of the cases in Ontario, Alberta and Manitoba ended in an absolute discharge, conditional discharge or suspended sentence. Regardless of the charge, we ended up with nine appearances in court.
We've heard witnesses for months now talk about needing more legal aid, more Crown counsels, more courts and more judges. To be fair, I think the vast majority of us think we need less people going to court.
I appreciate that we are behind on appointments, but I do think that there's an opportunity for the federal government to influence provincial governments to actually act on nine appearances for cases that are going to be suspended sentences.
In Ontario, out of 200,000 cases in 2010, 50,000 of those cases would end up there. My friends from the Department of Justice worked on some of that with us when I was a police chief and came up with the exact same stats. No one was against what we were suggesting, yet nobody has implemented some of those suggestions.
More than anything — and I have to put this in the form of a question — wouldn't you agree that there's an opportunity for the department to be the initiator of some of those dialogues? I'm not suggesting you, minister, but the department to be the initiator of the dialogue about pushing those cases into almost any other model other than what we're doing right now?
The Deputy Chair: You're asking of the department?
Senator White: Yes.
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I acknowledge your comments and certainly recognize that we, the Department of Justice, have the opportunity to initiate, to reach out and first of all recognize where provinces and territories have taken substantive steps in terms of investing and having more prosecutors. We are taking steps to ensure that we invested in legal aid and other areas, but again we have been, as you know, working in many different areas to come up with substantive solutions that we can move forward on.
Senator White: Thank you for being here, minister.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: Ms. Wilson-Raybould, I have a question that is in the same vein as the one asked by Senator Pratte. I will try to paint a picture for you, and you will tell me if you understand.
I spent 30 years in the Quebec government in the area of emergency preparedness; think of the collapsing dams in Lac-Saint-Jean. Justice is a collapsing building in Canada, and especially in Quebec. I'm trying to understand your strategy and your plan, where you will hold consultations and then see what will happen.
From a perspective based strictly on the political reality, when the government is facing a disaster, it first takes urgent action. Afterwards, it implements a recovery plan. Am I wrong or am I right? I feel like you are working only on the recovery plan, but that you are forgetting to focus your efforts on emergencies to avoid everything collapsing even further.
Trials should not just be dismissed, as we will lose public confidence in our justice system. I think the government has the responsibility to take immediate action to then be able to recover the system. I am under the impression that you are working only on rebuilding the system and that you are forgetting about emergency measures.
[English]
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: I would respectfully disagree, senator. As I state, we are doing the comprehensive review of the criminal justice system. There is no one silver bullet that is going to resolve the court delays that exist throughout the system. I am proceeding as expeditiously as possible within the realm of the solutions that I have as federal minister, and I am absolutely, without equivocation, committed to working with the provinces and territories to ensure that we do everything we can to address the delays in the criminal justice system.
I want to say thank you to the honourable senators and to assure you that this is of paramount importance to me as the federal Minister of Justice, and I will continue to work with my very hard-working officials, with officials in all of the jurisdictions across the country to now, after many, many years, address substantively a system that, as one senator said, needs a culture shift, and the Supreme Court.
The Deputy Chair: Minister, this committee will have its report in a couple of months. We've travelled right throughout Canada and interviewed judges in practically every province, both in camera and publicly. We've interviewed defence attorneys right across the country, Crown counsel, police, victims' rights groups and victims and so on. You will receive from this committee a definitive report. You will see not just the broad strokes but the specificity that is required to correct the system.
We thank you for your commitment to take our report, to read it through to our final recommendations and hopefully to institute the changes that we suggest. We thank you for coming here today.
Ms. Wilson-Raybould: Thank you, honourable senators.
The Deputy Chair: Meeting adjourned.
(The committee adjourned.)