ARCHIVED - Chapter 8: Conclusion - Judge Advocate General Annual Report 2008-09

As was stated by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Généreux, the safety and well-being of Canadians depends on the willingness and readiness of a force of men and women to defend threats to the nation's security. The military justice system allows the Canadian Forces to deal with disciplinary matters in an effective and efficient manner.¹ To that end, the military justice system must ensure that the requirement for discipline is balanced with the rights of CF members to be treated in a fair and just manner.

This report provides an overview of the 2008-2009 reporting period along with a synopsis of the military justice initiatives undertaken by the Office of the JAG. Overall, this report reflects that CF members as well as the Canadian public have a high level of confidence in the Military Justice system. This is the direct result of the hard work and dedication that has gone into the system. The statistical data reviewed and analysed for this reporting period demonstrates a slight reduction in the number of summary trials conducted from the previous year.

Of the charges dealt with at summary trial, just over half were laid under section 129 of the National Defence Act (NDA). This number is consistent with previous years. Of note is the significant decrease in negligent discharge charges laid in operational settings. In this regard, the Office of the JAG will continue to monitor the statistics related to these offences and advise the chain of command should any trends develop.

The number of courts martial decreased from 78 in the previous reporting period to 65 during this period which is relatively consistent with the five-year average of 67. Regarding the ongoing issue of delay within the courts martial system, continued efforts are being made to address this issue including the review of the operations of Defence Counsel Services by an external review group. It is expected that the final report on this review will be submitted to the Office of the JAG in the next reporting period.

With regard to summary trials, it is possible to conclude from the military justice survey that the majority of participants, including accused, consider the system fair. This is consistent with previous reporting periods. This year's survey indicates an increase in compliance among participants with the regulatory requirements related to the administration of summary trials.

The reporting period was very active from a legislative, regulatory and policy perspective. Bill C-45, among other things: proposed significant amendments to the NDA including securing the independence of military judges, elaborating the principles of sentencing in the military justice system, enlarging the scope of sentencing options, setting out the duties and functions of the Canadian Forces Provost Martial and expanding the ability of the Chief of Defence Staff to delegate his powers as a final authority in the grievance process to expedite the process of grievances. Bill C-45 did not advance past first reading due to the dissolution of Parliament in the fall of 2008.

Bill C-60 came into effect during the reporting period and served to significantly alter how the mode of trial by courts martial is determined. It reduced the types of courts martial from four to two. Other legislative and regulatory changes included the coming into force of the Sex Offender Information Registration Act and regulations to the military justice system along with changes to the DNA scheme and corresponding changes to the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces.

With respect to strategic initiatives, the Office of the JAG has continued to collect data on the court martial and summary trial results through the Court Martial Reporting System and the Summary Trial Database. In the next reporting period, work will continue on modernizing these information banks to a web-based format along with coordinating other information management initiatives within the Office of the JAG.

As in past years, this reporting period reflected a wide use of disciplinary tribunals supporting the notion that the chain of command is confident in its military justice system. The dedication shown by members of the Office of the JAG, in collaboration with partners from DND and the CF, has served to support the operational effectiveness of the military justice system and the rule of law by enhancing that system through legislative, regulatory or policy development.

Footnotes

¹ R.v. Généreux, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 259.