CLOSING THE BARN DOOR
After four year delay, bill to require sexual assault training for judges nears passageTHIS IS THE RESULT OF RED NECK JUDGES IN ALBERTA
OTTAWA — Four years after it was first introduced in Parliament, a bill that requires sexual assault training for federally appointed judges is getting close to passage after emerging from the Senate legal affairs committee on Thursday without amendment.
Potential amendments were voted down over the protests of some Conservative senators who wanted to add in language around domestic and intimate partner violence.
Bill C-3 still needs to pass a final vote in the full Senate chamber, but the committee vote is a strong sign the bill won’t see any other major changes that could potentially delay it. The current legislation is the third version of the bill after two previous versions died on the order paper — once because of an election call and once because of prorogation.
Former Conservative Party leader Rona Ambrose, who introduced the original version of the bill in 2017, appeared before the committee Wednesday evening to urge senators to keep the legislation moving along.
“I admit I am a bit saddened and frustrated to be appearing before this committee again on similar legislation,” Ambrose said. “To just put it into perspective, when I first introduced my original bill, Donald Trump had just been inaugurated and the Me Too movement hadn’t even happened yet. But here we are again.”
On Thursday, Conservative senators pushed to amend the bill to have the training specifically include matters of domestic violence. But other senators pushed back on this, saying the training would already include this as a component and that further amending the bill — which would then require a response from the House of Commons — risked causing delay.
MPs amend judge sex-assault training bill to add systemic racism training, sparking new concerns
With the possibility of a snap election call any week, some senators warned that the bill could die on the order paper for a third time.
“I understand the spirit behind this amendment but I come to the conclusion it is not strictly speaking necessary, and that it will unnecessarily jeopardize the adoption of this bill,” said Sen. Pierre Dalphond, a former Quebec judge who sits in the Progressive Senate Group.
“We’re in a minority parliament and in the middle of a pandemic,” said Sen. Marc Gold, the government representative in the Senate, noting that COVID-19 bills and the upcoming budget will take priority in the legislative process. “If we want to jeopardize this legislation, the easiest way to do that is to amend it … Could it do more? Probably? Do I wish it could do more? Sure. But my view right now is that we need to get this done.”
Conservative Sen. Claude Carignan, speaking in French, called these arguments “embarrassing” and “fearmongering.” He said there’s no reason that a bill with all-party support in the Commons would need to be delayed if the Senate amends it.
But Ambrose, speaking the previous night, had also urged senators to not make further changes to the bill.
“I wish that this bill could be a catch-all for many things,” Ambrose said. “There’s many issues that have come up over the four years that we wish we could do more on. But this is a bill focused on the Judge’s Act. It’s been very carefully negotiated by the Attorney General Canada and others … I am concerned that if we amend it, it will take more time, because it will. It may not pass because it’ll have to go back to the House.”
Instead of amending the bill, the Senate added observations to it in the hopes that its concerns will be addressed by the courts and judicial organizations on their own.
One reason why the bill has been delayed so long is because of concerns around its constitutionality for intruding on judicial independence. Critics point out that judges already have sexual assault law training as part of their continuing education, and worry the bill will open the door to politicians venturing into all kinds of other topics for judicial training.
But supporters argue this bill is simply Parliament signalling that more must be done to protect the rights of sexual assault complainants and avoid basic legal errors. They note that judicial organizations are still responsible for creating the actual training content.
Still, the original version of the bill was substantially scaled back in the Senate in 2019 to make it less intrusive on judicial independence. That bill then fell victim to political manoeuvring related to other bills, and died on the order paper when the election was called. A new version was introduced by Justice Minister David Lametti in February 2020, but that bill also perished when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau prorogued Parliament in August.
The current version of the legislation amends the Judge’s Act to require judges “undertake to participate in continuing education” on sexual assault and social context, and requires that the Canadian Judicial Council develop the training “with persons, groups or organizations the Council considers appropriate, such as sexual assault survivors and groups and organizations that support them.” It requires the Council to report to Parliament on when the seminars were given and how many judges attended.
The bill was also amended by the House of Commons last fall to specify that social context includes “systemic racism and systemic discrimination.”
Provided by National Post Justice Minister David Lametti listens as former Conservative MP Rona Ambrose speaks about a bill on sexual assault law training for judges, Feb. 4, 2020 on Parliament Hill.
OTTAWA — Four years after it was first introduced in Parliament, a bill that requires sexual assault training for federally appointed judges is getting close to passage after emerging from the Senate legal affairs committee on Thursday without amendment.
Potential amendments were voted down over the protests of some Conservative senators who wanted to add in language around domestic and intimate partner violence.
Bill C-3 still needs to pass a final vote in the full Senate chamber, but the committee vote is a strong sign the bill won’t see any other major changes that could potentially delay it. The current legislation is the third version of the bill after two previous versions died on the order paper — once because of an election call and once because of prorogation.
Former Conservative Party leader Rona Ambrose, who introduced the original version of the bill in 2017, appeared before the committee Wednesday evening to urge senators to keep the legislation moving along.
“I admit I am a bit saddened and frustrated to be appearing before this committee again on similar legislation,” Ambrose said. “To just put it into perspective, when I first introduced my original bill, Donald Trump had just been inaugurated and the Me Too movement hadn’t even happened yet. But here we are again.”
On Thursday, Conservative senators pushed to amend the bill to have the training specifically include matters of domestic violence. But other senators pushed back on this, saying the training would already include this as a component and that further amending the bill — which would then require a response from the House of Commons — risked causing delay.
MPs amend judge sex-assault training bill to add systemic racism training, sparking new concerns
With the possibility of a snap election call any week, some senators warned that the bill could die on the order paper for a third time.
“I understand the spirit behind this amendment but I come to the conclusion it is not strictly speaking necessary, and that it will unnecessarily jeopardize the adoption of this bill,” said Sen. Pierre Dalphond, a former Quebec judge who sits in the Progressive Senate Group.
“We’re in a minority parliament and in the middle of a pandemic,” said Sen. Marc Gold, the government representative in the Senate, noting that COVID-19 bills and the upcoming budget will take priority in the legislative process. “If we want to jeopardize this legislation, the easiest way to do that is to amend it … Could it do more? Probably? Do I wish it could do more? Sure. But my view right now is that we need to get this done.”
Conservative Sen. Claude Carignan, speaking in French, called these arguments “embarrassing” and “fearmongering.” He said there’s no reason that a bill with all-party support in the Commons would need to be delayed if the Senate amends it.
But Ambrose, speaking the previous night, had also urged senators to not make further changes to the bill.
“I wish that this bill could be a catch-all for many things,” Ambrose said. “There’s many issues that have come up over the four years that we wish we could do more on. But this is a bill focused on the Judge’s Act. It’s been very carefully negotiated by the Attorney General Canada and others … I am concerned that if we amend it, it will take more time, because it will. It may not pass because it’ll have to go back to the House.”
Instead of amending the bill, the Senate added observations to it in the hopes that its concerns will be addressed by the courts and judicial organizations on their own.
One reason why the bill has been delayed so long is because of concerns around its constitutionality for intruding on judicial independence. Critics point out that judges already have sexual assault law training as part of their continuing education, and worry the bill will open the door to politicians venturing into all kinds of other topics for judicial training.
But supporters argue this bill is simply Parliament signalling that more must be done to protect the rights of sexual assault complainants and avoid basic legal errors. They note that judicial organizations are still responsible for creating the actual training content.
Still, the original version of the bill was substantially scaled back in the Senate in 2019 to make it less intrusive on judicial independence. That bill then fell victim to political manoeuvring related to other bills, and died on the order paper when the election was called. A new version was introduced by Justice Minister David Lametti in February 2020, but that bill also perished when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau prorogued Parliament in August.
The current version of the legislation amends the Judge’s Act to require judges “undertake to participate in continuing education” on sexual assault and social context, and requires that the Canadian Judicial Council develop the training “with persons, groups or organizations the Council considers appropriate, such as sexual assault survivors and groups and organizations that support them.” It requires the Council to report to Parliament on when the seminars were given and how many judges attended.
The bill was also amended by the House of Commons last fall to specify that social context includes “systemic racism and systemic discrimination.”
Brian Platt 2021-04-01
• Email: bplatt@postmedia.com | Twitter: btaplatt
• Email: bplatt@postmedia.com | Twitter: btaplatt
No comments:
Post a Comment