Bill C-11, Military Justice System Modernization Act · Report stage · now law Where it stands
The law removes the military's authority to investigate or try sexual offences under the Criminal Code that are alleged to have taken place in Canada. It alters appointment processes for military prosecutors, defence counsel, and the provost marshal, who is renamed the Provost Marshal General. The law also expands who can become a military judge, removes those judges from the summary hearing system, and lets people acting for victims request a liaison officer.
55 statements
“I want the member to talk about why victims of sexual trauma need to trust the justice system.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like my colleague to talk a bit about the importance of people’s trust in the justice system when they are victims of sexual trauma.”
Mr. Speaker, I would like my colleague to talk a bit about the importance of people’s trust in the justice system when they are victims of sexual trauma.
“The justice system needs to support victims of sexual violence better and understand their trauma. People need to trust the system so they feel safe coming forward.”
“Mr. Speaker, when victims are facing sexual misconduct or violence, it is so important to have a trauma-based response because going through the justice system re-emphasizes the challenges and hurt that they have gone through. We need to make sure that our justice system not only provides support to Canadians who are trying to move forward, seek justice for themselves and end the harm they have been facing, but also provides the perception of justice being conducted so that more people who have been harmed and have faced sexual violence or misconduct are also able to come forward and trust the system to take care of their justice as well.”
Mr. Speaker, when victims are facing sexual misconduct or violence, it is so important to have a trauma-based response because going through the justice system re-emphasizes the challenges and hurt that they have gone through. We need to make sure that our justice system not only provides support to Canadians who are trying to move forward, seek justice for themselves and end the harm they have been facing, but also provides the perception of justice being conducted so that more people who have been harmed and have faced sexual violence or misconduct are also able to come forward and trust the system to take care of their justice as well.
“I support this bill because it helps fix sexual misconduct in the military. It is a good step forward, but we still need to do much more to support victims.”
“Mr. Speaker, we have to understand that sexual misconduct and violence, even in the Canadian Armed Forces, is not something that came within a day, and it is not something that is going to go away within a day, either. Yes, Bill C-11 is very important and there has been a lot of progress made within the Canadian Armed Forces, but there is a lot more that should be done to continue to support victims of violence and misconduct. That requires support from all across the aisle. What Justice Arbour provided is a good starting point. What Bill C-11 would do, I think, is an excellent way to move forward, but it would not be the end. We need to do significantly more.”
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 100 of 100
Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.
See full analysisMr. Speaker, we have to understand that sexual misconduct and violence, even in the Canadian Armed Forces, is not something that came within a day, and it is not something that is going to go away within a day, either. Yes, Bill C-11 is very important and there has been a lot of progress made within the Canadian Armed Forces, but there is a lot more that should be done to continue to support victims of violence and misconduct. That requires support from all across the aisle. What Justice Arbour provided is a good starting point. What Bill C-11 would do, I think, is an excellent way to move forward, but it would not be the end. We need to do significantly more.
“This bill is based on expert recommendations to fix the military justice system. The Conservatives used to support this work. I want to know why they have changed their minds and are opposing it now.”
“Mr. Speaker, the legislation does have substance and it does meet the reality. What is absent is any sort of Conservative rationale for what the Conservatives are doing to the bill. Justice Arbour’s recommendation five is the essence of the legislation. Justice Arbour worked with literally hundreds, going into thousands, of people, either directly or indirectly, with CAF to ensure that we had the right recommendation. Even the standing committee that the member was referencing earlier came up with another recommendation supporting it. I have never heard the Conservatives, prior to today, question Justice Arbour. Why has the Conservative Party flipped its position and is not listening—”
Mr. Speaker, the legislation does have substance and it does meet the reality. What is absent is any sort of Conservative rationale for what the Conservatives are doing to the bill. Justice Arbour’s recommendation five is the essence of the legislation. Justice Arbour worked with literally hundreds, going into thousands, of people, either directly or indirectly, with CAF to ensure that we had the right recommendation. Even the standing committee that the member was referencing earlier came up with another recommendation supporting it. I have never heard the Conservatives, prior to today, question Justice Arbour. Why has the Conservative Party flipped its position and is not listening—
“A House committee studied women in the military and heard from over 100 witnesses. All parties agreed that sexual crimes in the military should be investigated and prosecuted by civilian police and courts, not the military. This bill does that.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague across the way for her work on the national defence committee. In 2024, the ACVA committee undertook an extensive study regarding women in the military. More than 100 witnesses came forward over 23 meetings, testifying before the ACVA committee. From that committee came a report that was tabled in Parliament and included recommendation 40, and this was unanimous. All parties agreed: That the Department of National Defence, in accordance with the many recommendations made in the wake of the Deschamps, Fish and Arbour reports, establish a reporting mechanism outside of the military chain of command, provide victims of military sexual trauma with safe and confidential legal resources, and transfer the jurisdiction to investigate sexual misconduct and prosecute its perpetrators to civilian authorities. That is exactly what Bill C‑11 would do.”
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague across the way for her work on the national defence committee. In 2024, the ACVA committee undertook an extensive study regarding women in the military. More than 100 witnesses came forward over 23 meetings, testifying before the ACVA committee. From that committee came a report that was tabled in Parliament and included recommendation 40, and this was unanimous. All parties agreed: That the Department of National Defence, in accordance with the many recommendations made in the wake of the Deschamps, Fish and Arbour reports, establish a reporting mechanism outside of the military chain of command, provide victims of military sexual trauma with safe and confidential legal resources, and transfer the jurisdiction to investigate sexual misconduct and prosecute its perpetrators to civilian authorities. That is exactly what Bill C‑11 would do.
“I support this bill. It permanently moves the investigation and trial of sexual offences in the military to civilian police and courts, as an independent report recommended. I oppose the opposition amendments because they try to undo this change.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-11 at report stage. I know the impact that our brave men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have on operations at home and abroad, and I am pleased to speak to efforts that our government is making to keep them safe. We know that to fulfill our role as a NATO ally, we must have forces that are ready, able and agile. Just this week, we heard that the Canadian Armed Forces has reached a 30-year record high for recruitment. This is fantastic news for Canada and for the Canadian Armed Forces, but we cannot take anything for granted. We must keep up the momentum and work hard to create a safe workplace where our forces and the next generation of forces can thrive and make meaningful contributions to Canada. This starts with making sure we provide our forces with a safe and professional work environment in which to train and to build up their skills for the difficult job we ask of them. This is why I am pleased to rise today to speak about the important work that is being done to modernize our military justice system and to restore trust in the Canadian Armed Forces. Bill C-11, the military justice system modernization act, is a critical step toward lasting institutional reform, as well as toward strengthening trust and confidence in our military justice system. Over the past four years, Canadians, including Canadian Armed Forces members, watched as former Supreme Court justices Arbour and Fish put forward detailed recommendations on how to create meaningful and lasting cultural change in the armed forces. Their recommendations have been compiled into a comprehensive implementation plan, which Canadians can easily access online to track the progress the CAF is making. These reviews and recommendations have helped define how the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are undertaking changes to the military justice system and cultural change. Today I would like to provide an overview of those recommendations and to speak specifically about the implementation of Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5, which is at the heart of Bill C-11. In 2022, Justice Arbour submitted her final report on sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces to the minister of national defence at the time. This report, also known as the report of the independent external comprehensive review, contains 48 recommendations focused on reforming the institutional gaps and structural barriers that have allowed the problem to persist. In her report, her fifth recommendation proposed a transformative measure to move the investigation and prosecution of sexual offences in Canada alleged against Canadian Armed Forces members to the civilian system. I want to take the time to read out the specific wording of Justice Arbour’s recommendation for all members: Criminal Code sexual offences should be removed from the jurisdiction of the [Canadian Armed Forces]. They should be prosecuted exclusively in civilian criminal courts in all cases. Where the offence takes place in Canada, it should be investigated by civilian police forces at the earliest opportunity. Where the offence takes place outside of Canada, the MP may act in the first instance to safeguard evidence and commence an investigation, but should liaise with civilian law enforcement at the earliest possible opportunity. In short, this recommendation would codify in law that the Canadian Armed Forces no longer has jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual misconduct offences committed in Canada. This recommendation would also codify in law that civilian authorities have exclusive jurisdiction for investigating and prosecuting these cases. I want to note that Justice Arbour acknowledged in her report that removing concurrent jurisdiction by amending the National Defence Act would take several years to implement, given the size, scale and scope of the changes needed. In fact, she knew how critical this recommendation was, and she proposed that we adopt an interim directive in the meantime to ensure that the change would take place as quickly as possible. She stated: As previous experience with changes to the military justice system have shown, this will take several years to implement. In the meantime, I expect the [Canadian Armed Forces] and civilian authorities to continue to abide by my interim recommendation. The [Canadian Armed Forces] should cease to investigate and prosecute sexual offences over which it presently has concurrent jurisdiction. Civilian authorities should investigate and prosecute those cases in accordance with their existing concurrent jurisdiction. The interim directive has been in place since December 2021 and has been working well. Since then, every single new Criminal Code sexual misconduct case has been prosecuted in the civilian courts rather than in the military justice system. While the interim directive was in place, the legislation was first introduced in the last Parliament as Bill C-66 and was one of the first bills to be introduced in the current Parliament in the fall of 2025, as Bill C-11. That is precisely because our government recognizes the importance of building a more inclusive, respectful and safe workplace for our Canadian Armed Forces members. The bill would implement Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5 and protect our forces. However, the amendments proposed by the opposition parties in the Standing Committee on National Defence run directly counter to recommendation 5. The opposition parties put forward amendments to strike down recommendation 5 and to remove Justice Arbour’s recommendation from the bill. The opposition’s amendments would make it even more difficult for victims to navigate the justice system, due to the complexity of the new procedures included in the bill. The lack of clarity and transparency would have a negative impact on the military justice system and on victims and survivors. We cannot go backwards and reverse any of the important changes made on military culture change over the last five years. In fact, since December 2021, all new charges of sexual offences covered by the Criminal Code have been brought in the civilian justice system. None of these offences are tried by the military justice system. To accept the opposition’s amendments would be to reverse this progress and to move backwards. In conclusion, the bill would establish a clear framework for investigating and addressing allegations of sexual misconduct, in order to foster an environment of accountability and justice. Bill C-11, and the amendment it seeks to codify in the National Defence Act, represents a crucial step towards strengthening the forces’ trust in the military justice system. This is not the case with the amendments proposed by the opposition parties to remove Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5 from Bill C-11. We are encouraged by the positive changes and cultural evolution in the Canadian Armed Forces in recent years, but we cannot stop here, and we cannot move backwards. The people who serve our country risk everything for us. Members of the Canadian Armed Forces must always answer the call to keep Canada safe, and it is our obligation to keep them safe from harassment and misconduct.”
A repeated line
“All new charges of sexual offences under the Criminal Code have been brought in the civilian justice system.”
Said 4 times by 4 members since April 23.
Every time it was saidMr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-11 at report stage. I know the impact that our brave men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have on operations at home and abroad, and I am pleased to speak to efforts that our government is making to keep them safe. We know that to fulfill our role as a NATO ally, we must have forces that are ready, able and agile. Just this week, we heard that the Canadian Armed Forces has reached a 30-year record high for recruitment. This is fantastic news for Canada and for the Canadian Armed Forces, but we cannot take anything for granted. We must keep up the momentum and work hard to create a safe workplace where our forces and the next generation of forces can thrive and make meaningful contributions to Canada. This starts with making sure we provide our forces with a safe and professional work environment in which to train and to build up their skills for the difficult job we ask of them. This is why I am pleased to rise today to speak about the important work that is being done to modernize our military justice system and to restore trust in the Canadian Armed Forces. Bill C-11, the military justice system modernization act, is a critical step toward lasting institutional reform, as well as toward strengthening trust and confidence in our military justice system. Over the past four years, Canadians, including Canadian Armed Forces members, watched as former Supreme Court justices Arbour and Fish put forward detailed recommendations on how to create meaningful and lasting cultural change in the armed forces. Their recommendations have been compiled into a comprehensive implementation plan, which Canadians can easily access online to track the progress the CAF is making. These reviews and recommendations have helped define how the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are undertaking changes to the military justice system and cultural change. Today I would like to provide an overview of those recommendations and to speak specifically about the implementation of Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5, which is at the heart of Bill C-11. In 2022, Justice Arbour submitted her final report on sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces to the minister of national defence at the time. This report, also known as the report of the independent external comprehensive review, contains 48 recommendations focused on reforming the institutional gaps and structural barriers that have allowed the problem to persist. In her report, her fifth recommendation proposed a transformative measure to move the investigation and prosecution of sexual offences in Canada alleged against Canadian Armed Forces members to the civilian system. I want to take the time to read out the specific wording of Justice Arbour’s recommendation for all members: Criminal Code sexual offences should be removed from the jurisdiction of the [Canadian Armed Forces]. They should be prosecuted exclusively in civilian criminal courts in all cases. Where the offence takes place in Canada, it should be investigated by civilian police forces at the earliest opportunity. Where the offence takes place outside of Canada, the MP may act in the first instance to safeguard evidence and commence an investigation, but should liaise with civilian law enforcement at the earliest possible opportunity. In short, this recommendation would codify in law that the Canadian Armed Forces no longer has jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual misconduct offences committed in Canada. This recommendation would also codify in law that civilian authorities have exclusive jurisdiction for investigating and prosecuting these cases. I want to note that Justice Arbour acknowledged in her report that removing concurrent jurisdiction by amending the National Defence Act would take several years to implement, given the size, scale and scope of the changes needed. In fact, she knew how critical this recommendation was, and she proposed that we adopt an interim directive in the meantime to ensure that the change would take place as quickly as possible. She stated: As previous experience with changes to the military justice system have shown, this will take several years to implement. In the meantime, I expect the [Canadian Armed Forces] and civilian authorities to continue to abide by my interim recommendation. The [Canadian Armed Forces] should cease to investigate and prosecute sexual offences over which it presently has concurrent jurisdiction. Civilian authorities should investigate and prosecute those cases in accordance with their existing concurrent jurisdiction. The interim directive has been in place since December 2021 and has been working well. Since then, every single new Criminal Code sexual misconduct case has been prosecuted in the civilian courts rather than in the military justice system. While the interim directive was in place, the legislation was first introduced in the last Parliament as Bill C-66 and was one of the first bills to be introduced in the current Parliament in the fall of 2025, as Bill C-11. That is precisely because our government recognizes the importance of building a more inclusive, respectful and safe workplace for our Canadian Armed Forces members. The bill would implement Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5 and protect our forces. However, the amendments proposed by the opposition parties in the Standing Committee on National Defence run directly counter to recommendation 5. The opposition parties put forward amendments to strike down recommendation 5 and to remove Justice Arbour’s recommendation from the bill. The opposition’s amendments would make it even more difficult for victims to navigate the justice system, due to the complexity of the new procedures included in the bill. The lack of clarity and transparency would have a negative impact on the military justice system and on victims and survivors. We cannot go backwards and reverse any of the important changes made on military culture change over the last five years. In fact, since December 2021, all new charges of sexual offences covered by the Criminal Code have been brought in the civilian justice system. None of these offences are tried by the military justice system. To accept the opposition’s amendments would be to reverse this progress and to move backwards. In conclusion, the bill would establish a clear framework for investigating and addressing allegations of sexual misconduct, in order to foster an environment of accountability and justice. Bill C-11, and the amendment it seeks to codify in the National Defence Act, represents a crucial step towards strengthening the forces’ trust in the military justice system. This is not the case with the amendments proposed by the opposition parties to remove Justice Arbour’s recommendation 5 from Bill C-11. We are encouraged by the positive changes and cultural evolution in the Canadian Armed Forces in recent years, but we cannot stop here, and we cannot move backwards. The people who serve our country risk everything for us. Members of the Canadian Armed Forces must always answer the call to keep Canada safe, and it is our obligation to keep them safe from harassment and misconduct.
“Sexual assault is always serious. I do not have the exact numbers, but all these cases are now being handled by civilian courts, just as Justice Arbour recommended.”
“Mr. Speaker, first of all, I am appalled by the member’s use of the term “low-level sexual assaults”. Sexual assault is sexual assault. With respect to numbers, no, I am not privy to the actual numbers of cases, but we do know that all these cases are being tried, as per Justice Arbour’s recommendation, by the civilian courts.”
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 100 of 100
Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.
See full analysisMr. Speaker, first of all, I am appalled by the member’s use of the term “low-level sexual assaults”. Sexual assault is sexual assault. With respect to numbers, no, I am not privy to the actual numbers of cases, but we do know that all these cases are being tried, as per Justice Arbour’s recommendation, by the civilian courts.
“This bill follows an expert report that says military sexual assault cases should move to regular civilian courts. I am asking the member to support this change, just like the Conservatives did two years ago.”
“Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the member’s comment that a sexual assault is a sexual assault. I think that does need to be reinforced. As parliamentarians, we have an obligation to seek the best advice possible. The Arbour report contained 48 recommendations, I believe, the vast majority of which have been implemented. The essence of its primary recommendation is in the bill, which is to convert from the military system to the civilian system. Given Justice Arbour’s efforts, would the member not agree that we should be abiding by that recommendation, as the Conservatives did just two years ago?”
Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the member’s comment that a sexual assault is a sexual assault. I think that does need to be reinforced. As parliamentarians, we have an obligation to seek the best advice possible. The Arbour report contained 48 recommendations, I believe, the vast majority of which have been implemented. The essence of its primary recommendation is in the bill, which is to convert from the military system to the civilian system. Given Justice Arbour’s efforts, would the member not agree that we should be abiding by that recommendation, as the Conservatives did just two years ago?
“I agree that cases like this should only be handled in regular civilian courts. An expert former Supreme Court judge recommended this after talking to hundreds of victims and witnesses. Other members should stop dismissing her work.”
“Mr. Speaker, I agree completely with the hon. member that this was Justice Arbour’s core recommendation. I am rather disheartened to hear a pattern of members’ trying to diminish the results of Justice Arbour by saying, “by this one justice”. It is part of a greater and very disturbing trend of demeaning and diminishing the results of experts and of using “expert” as a pejorative. Justice Arbour was a former Supreme Court justice who talked to hundreds of witnesses, hundreds of victims, and determined that the best course of action would be for these cases to be tried solely by civilian courts.”
Mr. Speaker, I agree completely with the hon. member that this was Justice Arbour’s core recommendation. I am rather disheartened to hear a pattern of members’ trying to diminish the results of Justice Arbour by saying, “by this one justice”. It is part of a greater and very disturbing trend of demeaning and diminishing the results of experts and of using “expert” as a pejorative. Justice Arbour was a former Supreme Court justice who talked to hundreds of witnesses, hundreds of victims, and determined that the best course of action would be for these cases to be tried solely by civilian courts.
“All sexual assault cases in the military should be handled by regular civilian courts. This keeps the trials fair and free from military influence.”
“Mr. Speaker, again, I say sexual assault is sexual assault. We have a justice system that is outside the chain of command. It is outside any coercion and outside any influence on the career of the Canadian Armed Forces member. There is no place for grading these levels of sexual assault. Again, all cases of sexual assault need to be tried in the civilian system.”
Mr. Speaker, again, I say sexual assault is sexual assault. We have a justice system that is outside the chain of command. It is outside any coercion and outside any influence on the career of the Canadian Armed Forces member. There is no place for grading these levels of sexual assault. Again, all cases of sexual assault need to be tried in the civilian system.
“A House committee made this same recommendation less than two years ago. I want to know what the member thinks about that.”
“Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague and I actually travelled together to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Passchendaele. I know his commitment to the Canadian Armed Forces is one that is incredibly supportive. I just want to ask him what his thoughts are on the fact that the ACVA committee made the same recommendation, for us to do this, not even two years ago.”
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague and I actually travelled together to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Passchendaele. I know his commitment to the Canadian Armed Forces is one that is incredibly supportive. I just want to ask him what his thoughts are on the fact that the ACVA committee made the same recommendation, for us to do this, not even two years ago.
“I do not understand why the other members supported this idea two years ago but oppose it now. They say military culture has changed, but they have no proof.”
“Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that I do not get the disconnect, why this was accepted by the committee two years ago and what the change of heart has been. I hear statements that it is different because military culture has changed, but what evidence do they have of this?”
Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that I do not get the disconnect, why this was accepted by the committee two years ago and what the change of heart has been. I hear statements that it is different because military culture has changed, but what evidence do they have of this?
“Our government is listening to survivors and following independent reports. An all-party committee made the same recommendation as Justice Arbour. I want the Conservatives to listen to the victims too.”
“Mr. Speaker, I can appreciate that the member is trying to appeal to all members in the strongest way he can. However, the reality is that the government is listening to survivors. The government’s actions reinforce reports that have been brought forward. We can talk about the Justice Arbour report. He seemed to be offended that it is the report we reference. In June 2024, the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, which has representation from the Bloc, the Conservatives and the Liberals, recommended the same thing. I would appeal to the Conservatives to listen to all of the victims, like Justice Arbour did, both in confidence and out of confidence. She came up with the recommendation for a reason. Maybe the member could tell us why it is that Conservatives voted—”
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 100 of 100
Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.
See full analysisMr. Speaker, I can appreciate that the member is trying to appeal to all members in the strongest way he can. However, the reality is that the government is listening to survivors. The government’s actions reinforce reports that have been brought forward. We can talk about the Justice Arbour report. He seemed to be offended that it is the report we reference. In June 2024, the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, which has representation from the Bloc, the Conservatives and the Liberals, recommended the same thing. I would appeal to the Conservatives to listen to all of the victims, like Justice Arbour did, both in confidence and out of confidence. She came up with the recommendation for a reason. Maybe the member could tell us why it is that Conservatives voted—
“The member called a prime minister a groper. That is inappropriate language for the House. I want the member to take the comment back or apologize.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe the member said we had a known prime minister who was a groper. It is highly inappropriate and definitely unparliamentary to make assertions of that nature, and I would ask that you have the member either apologize or retract the comment, at the very least.”
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 0 of 100
None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.
See full analysisMr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe the member said we had a known prime minister who was a groper. It is highly inappropriate and definitely unparliamentary to make assertions of that nature, and I would ask that you have the member either apologize or retract the comment, at the very least.
“I want the House to pass this bill to update our military justice system. It follows advice from two big independent reports to stop harassment and fix our military culture. It also moves sexual assault cases out of military courts and into regular civilian courts.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has been clear that he is committed to ensuring that the defence team provides a workplace where all members, both military and civilian, feel supported and respected and have the opportunity to reach their full potential in their work. This is a top priority. Bill C-11 is a critical step toward achieving lasting institutional reform that will foster a culture of respect and accountability and strengthen confidence in the military justice system. With its proposed targeted amendments to the National Defence Act, the bill represents the next critical step in our efforts to implement the recommendations from the independent external comprehensive review and the third independent review of the National Defence Act. This bill is also essential to support future legislative changes that may be required over time to implement additional recommendations and to advance future efforts to foster culture change. Today, I would like to provide an overview of these external independent reviews and talk about the progress that the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have made in addressing the recommendations from these reviews. Let us start with the independent external comprehensive review, also know as the IECR. The review was launched in April 2021 and led by former Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour to examine harassment and sexual misconduct within the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, as well as the policies, procedures, programs, practices and culture that have allowed these harms to persist. This includes reviewing policies surrounding the administration of military justice. The final report was released on May 30, 2022. The then defence minister welcomed the 48 recommendations. When the final report was received, 17 recommendations were accepted immediately, including recommendation 48, which is to appoint an external monitor, mandated to oversee the implementation of the IECR recommendations. The then minister appointed Jocelyne Therrien to the position of external monitor. During her tenure, she regularly provided the minister with updates on the implementation of the IECR recommendations. Those updates, which are available to the public, helped us perform our work in a focused and transparent manner in keeping with the expectations of Canadian Armed Forces personnel and the Canadian public. In August 2023, the new defence minister also announced the implementation of recommendations 7 and 9 to change the military grievance and harassment processes. Today, any Canadian Armed Forces member who has experienced any kind of sexual misconduct while performing their duties now has the option of filing a complaint directly with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, without being required to exhaust every possible internal grievance and harassment process first. Moreover, as the external monitor underscored in her June 2024 report, the repeal of the duty to report regulations was one of the most significant changes that the Canadian Armed Forces made to its sexual misconduct policy in recent years. In her recommendation 11, Justice Arbour underscored that, although well-intentioned, the regulations requiring military personnel to report cases of misconduct deprived survivors of their agency and control over the reporting process and could sometimes end up re-victimizing the very people they were meant to protect. In recommendation 28 and in the first part of recommendation 29, the IECR report also made recommendations concerning the military college system. In December 2023, the minister announced the names of the seven individuals selected to sit on the Canadian Military Colleges Review Board to review the situation at Canada’s two military colleges. Two members came from the department and the Canadian Armed Forces, and five were external experts on education and culture. In March 2025, the review board released its report, which included 49 recommendations covering a variety of areas, including costs, governance and quality of education and training. The implementation of recommendations from the Arbour report has continued, and the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have already started acting on some of the recommendations at Canada’s two military colleges. Ultimately, this is a cornerstone of Bill C‑11. The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are also taking into account the key aspects of IECR recommendation 15 by seeking to remove military jurisdiction over the investigation and prosecution of Criminal Code sexual offences that are committed in Canada. As of December 2021, all new charges for Criminal Code sexual offences are being laid in the civilian justice system, and none of these offences are being tried in the military justice system. The Canadian Forces Military Police Group is leading a working group on the operational framework for Criminal Code sexual offences, in conjunction with the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, Ontario’s Solicitor General and Ontario’s Ministry of the Attorney General, to develop a framework for transferring cases. In November 2020, former Supreme Court justice Morris J. Fish was appointed to conduct an independent review of specific provisions of the National Defence Act and their application. In June 2021, the department tabled the report in Parliament. Justice Fish presented the department with 107 sweeping recommendations, the majority of which support the ongoing modernization of the military justice system. He also offered recommendations aimed at strengthening the independence of the military police and others concerning the grievance process. Bill C‑11 also addresses several of these recommendations.”
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has been clear that he is committed to ensuring that the defence team provides a workplace where all members, both military and civilian, feel supported and respected and have the opportunity to reach their full potential in their work. This is a top priority. Bill C-11 is a critical step toward achieving lasting institutional reform that will foster a culture of respect and accountability and strengthen confidence in the military justice system. With its proposed targeted amendments to the National Defence Act, the bill represents the next critical step in our efforts to implement the recommendations from the independent external comprehensive review and the third independent review of the National Defence Act. This bill is also essential to support future legislative changes that may be required over time to implement additional recommendations and to advance future efforts to foster culture change. Today, I would like to provide an overview of these external independent reviews and talk about the progress that the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have made in addressing the recommendations from these reviews. Let us start with the independent external comprehensive review, also know as the IECR. The review was launched in April 2021 and led by former Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour to examine harassment and sexual misconduct within the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, as well as the policies, procedures, programs, practices and culture that have allowed these harms to persist. This includes reviewing policies surrounding the administration of military justice. The final report was released on May 30, 2022. The then defence minister welcomed the 48 recommendations. When the final report was received, 17 recommendations were accepted immediately, including recommendation 48, which is to appoint an external monitor, mandated to oversee the implementation of the IECR recommendations. The then minister appointed Jocelyne Therrien to the position of external monitor. During her tenure, she regularly provided the minister with updates on the implementation of the IECR recommendations. Those updates, which are available to the public, helped us perform our work in a focused and transparent manner in keeping with the expectations of Canadian Armed Forces personnel and the Canadian public. In August 2023, the new defence minister also announced the implementation of recommendations 7 and 9 to change the military grievance and harassment processes. Today, any Canadian Armed Forces member who has experienced any kind of sexual misconduct while performing their duties now has the option of filing a complaint directly with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, without being required to exhaust every possible internal grievance and harassment process first. Moreover, as the external monitor underscored in her June 2024 report, the repeal of the duty to report regulations was one of the most significant changes that the Canadian Armed Forces made to its sexual misconduct policy in recent years. In her recommendation 11, Justice Arbour underscored that, although well-intentioned, the regulations requiring military personnel to report cases of misconduct deprived survivors of their agency and control over the reporting process and could sometimes end up re-victimizing the very people they were meant to protect. In recommendation 28 and in the first part of recommendation 29, the IECR report also made recommendations concerning the military college system. In December 2023, the minister announced the names of the seven individuals selected to sit on the Canadian Military Colleges Review Board to review the situation at Canada’s two military colleges. Two members came from the department and the Canadian Armed Forces, and five were external experts on education and culture. In March 2025, the review board released its report, which included 49 recommendations covering a variety of areas, including costs, governance and quality of education and training. The implementation of recommendations from the Arbour report has continued, and the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have already started acting on some of the recommendations at Canada’s two military colleges. Ultimately, this is a cornerstone of Bill C‑11. The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are also taking into account the key aspects of IECR recommendation 15 by seeking to remove military jurisdiction over the investigation and prosecution of Criminal Code sexual offences that are committed in Canada. As of December 2021, all new charges for Criminal Code sexual offences are being laid in the civilian justice system, and none of these offences are being tried in the military justice system. The Canadian Forces Military Police Group is leading a working group on the operational framework for Criminal Code sexual offences, in conjunction with the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, Ontario’s Solicitor General and Ontario’s Ministry of the Attorney General, to develop a framework for transferring cases. In November 2020, former Supreme Court justice Morris J. Fish was appointed to conduct an independent review of specific provisions of the National Defence Act and their application. In June 2021, the department tabled the report in Parliament. Justice Fish presented the department with 107 sweeping recommendations, the majority of which support the ongoing modernization of the military justice system. He also offered recommendations aimed at strengthening the independence of the military police and others concerning the grievance process. Bill C‑11 also addresses several of these recommendations.
