• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 144 Ï NUMBER 031 Ï 2nd SESSION Ï 40th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Monday, March 23, 2009 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 1765 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, March 23, 2009 The House met at 11 a.m. in law. Canadian law is written in two inextricably interlinked languages. The Official Languages Act and the Canadian Charter of Rights Prayers and Freedoms ensure that the historical progress achieved in this regard is preserved. To understand the subtleties of the law and apply it integrally, one PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS must, at the very least, understand both official languages. One must also be able to listen to the parties without the help of an interpreter (1100) Ï to ensure that all rulings are completely impartial and objective. [Translation] Otherwise, the outcome could be very detrimental to the parties. SUPREME COURT ACT To ensure that our rights are protected, Supreme Court justices Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP) moved that Bill must understand the law as written in both English and French. C-232, An Act to amend the Supreme Court Act (understanding the Simultaneous interpretation and translation are not good enough: official languages), be read the second time and referred to a they result in interpretations that often differ from the original committee. meaning. He said: Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the hon. Ï (1105) member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley for supporting my bill. [English] The government has been refusing for far too long to establish an appointment criteria based on language proficiency for Supreme More and more Canadians agree that a judge on the bench of our Court judges, thereby interfering in an alarming way with individual country's highest court must not be partial or restricted to knowing rights. only half of the law because he or she knows only one of the official languages. [English] [Translation] The consequences have been human rights violations which Canada cannot tolerate. Members of Parliament and Canadian citizens may one day find themselves before the Supreme Court of Canada. Some may find [Translation] themselves living with the consequences of its rulings. I am confident, however, that change is on the way because in How would it feel to be the victim of injustice simply because one 2009, year of the 40th anniversary of the Official Languages Act, was not well understood? Canadians have decided to join forces and take action. In an unprecedented move, francophones and anglophones from What would happen if a judge could not get clarification as needed because of delays due to translation or interpretation? all backgrounds are coming together to support my bill, Bill C-232, to introduce a new requirement for judges appointed to the Supreme What would happen if judges were to discuss the fate of Court to understand English and French without the assistance of an individuals in a place not equipped with translation or interpretation interpreter. This requirement will not apply to currently sitting services? judges. What might the consequences be? We share the same goal: to restore a fundamental right of all Canadians, that is, the right to a fair and equitable trial. [English] Allow me to outline the context. As the hon. members probably As the Commissioner of Official Languages put it so well, “it's not know, the statutes of Canada are not written in one official language, through interpretation that we're necessarily going to understand all then translated into the other. They are drafted bilingually, neither the aspects of the debate prior to a case being brought before the language taking precedence over the other. Both versions are equal Supreme Court”. 1766 COMMONS DEBATES March 23, 2009 Private Members' Business [Translation] language proficiency is evidence that it is not considered an important requirement when judges are appointed. The government must therefore pay closer attention to judges' skills. Certainly, all judges must have a good knowledge of the law, The right to use a language in court also includes the right to be but language skills are just as important. understood directly in that language. What good is it to have the right to use your own language if the people you are speaking to The Commissioner of Official Languages, Graham Fraser, stated cannot understand it? Each party must be able to be heard in the following: conditions that do not put him or her at a disadvantage compared to —it seems to me that knowledge of both official languages should be one of the the opposing party. That is the purpose of my bill. qualifications sought for judges of Canada’s highest court. Setting such a standard would prove to all Canadians that the Government of Canada is committed to To ensure that the Supreme Court makes fully informed decisions linguistic duality. I find it essential that an institution as important as the Supreme Court of Canada not only be composed of judges with exceptional legal skills, but and that Canadians have the right to fair, equitable trials, I invite you also reflect our values and our Canadian identity as a bijural and bilingual country. to support my bill, Bill C-232. No one wants a misinformed judge to determine his or her future. On a related note, according to the Official Languages Act, every federal court has the duty to ensure that the language chosen by the Make history by joining me and the following organizations, as parties is understood by the judge or other officer who hears those well as all Canadians who have come out in favour of such a proceedings, without the assistance of an interpreter. The only measure: the Canadian Bar Association, the Association des juristes exception to that rule? The Supreme Court. d'expression française du Canada, the Young Bar Association of Montreal, the Fédération des communautés francophones et It is not fair that the law applies to federal courts such as the acadienne du Canada, the Quebec Community Groups Network, Federal Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Appeal and the Tax the Commissioner of Official Languages, the Fédération franco- Court of Canada, but not to the Supreme Court of Canada. Why the ténoise, the Fédération acadienne de la Nouvelle-Écosse, the Société exception? The law should be the same for everyone. Consider this nationale de l'Acadie, the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau- example. Judges have been appointed, even though they are not Brunswick, the National Assembly of Quebec, the Premier of bilingual, to the Federal Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Quebec and the Bloc Québécois, which wrote me to say it will Appeal and the Tax Court of Canada. Everyone can have their trial in support this bill. I certainly appreciate that gesture. the official language of their choice, and the judge must be bilingual. The Tax Court of Canada has more than one judge, but only one Without radically changing the current system, my bill will, in the judge is needed for the hearing. At the Supreme Court of Canada, long run, prevent appointments that go against the spirit of the law however, certain cases require all nine judges. Those nine judges and the charter. In this way, we will more effectively honour should therefore be able to understand the arguments in the client's language communities' rights, promote their equality and enhance language of choice. their vitality. The Supreme Court ruling handed down on February 5, 2009, in I am also asking Parliament, the Liberal Party and the the Caldech case reminded the federal government of its constitu- Conservative Party to truly ensure that people's language rights are tional duty to provide the public with services of equal quality in respected. For example, when the Supreme Court was established— both official languages. or any other court or institution for that matter—it was created for citizens, for Canadians as well as for Quebeckers. The court was not As the commissioner explained, this is an important principle that set up to pit citizens against judges, it was set up to serve citizens. clarifies the scope of the Official Languages Act. The service provided to citizens really should be in their own This ruling establishes that a broad view must be adopted when language. looking at equality, and that the government must consider the nature I have a great deal of respect for our interpreters and the great and purpose of the service in question when defining its linguistic work they do for us. I wish to thank them for it. However, the obligations. Supreme Court of Canada is the court of last resort, where judges In Canada, French enjoys equality of status and use with English. will hand down a ruling that could impact our lives, that could No litigant, whether francophone or anglophone, should therefore be change them forever. So, just imagine if the judge did not fully heard through interpretation or other measures before Canada's understand the arguments. highest court. Mr. Michel Doucet, a lawyer, of the University of Moncton said: [English] When you win a case by a nine to zero decision, that's far from being a dramatic situation, but when you lose a case in a five to four decision, as happened to me at Let us recognize the importance of making ourselves understood one point, and you've pleaded that case in French, you then go home and listen to the without interpreters or other interventions.

Load more

  78

Copy Link