Court Martial Comprehensive Review
Pursuant to his statutory responsibilities for superintendence and for the conduct of regular reviews of the administration of military justice under subsections 9.2(1) and (2) of the NDA, on 13 May 2016, the JAG directed the Deputy Judge Advocate General for Military Justice (DJAG MJ) to conduct a comprehensive review of the CAF’s court martial system. The purpose of this review is to conduct a legal and policy analysis of all aspects of the CAF’s court martial system and, where appropriate, to develop and analyze options to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency, and legitimacy of that system.
The comprehensive review commenced on 15 July 2016, and will produce a draft policy-based report for the JAG by 21 July 2017.
The Court Martial Comprehensive Review Team (CMCRT), comprised of legal officers from the Military Justice Division, is considering the following subject matter areas:
1. The status and institutional structure of tribunals/courts with jurisdiction over service offences, including whether they ought to be: military or civilian in character; permanent or ad hoc entities; and, capable of deploying to austere or hostile environments inside and outside of Canada;
2. The status and institutional structure of a prosecution service with responsibility for prosecuting service offences, including whether this service ought to be military or civilian in character, and capable of deploying to austere or hostile environments inside and outside of Canada;
3. The mechanism through which defence counsel services are provided to persons accused of committing service offences, including whether such services ought to be: provided by military or civilian lawyers; provided in whole or in part at public expense; and, capable of being provided within austere or hostile environments inside and outside of Canada;
4. The substantive body of service offences, including full consideration of whether any current offences ought to be updated or repealed, and whether any additional offences ought to be added;
5. The punishments, sanctions, and sentencing laws that apply in respect of service offences, including full consideration of whether any current sentencing provisions ought to be updated or repealed, and whether any additional sentencing options ought to be added;
6. The laws of evidence that ought to apply at trials in respect of service offences;
7. The rights, grounds, and mechanisms of appeal that ought to exist for the Crown and for persons subject to the CSD; and,
8. The special needs of any particular groups who may interact with the military justice system, including victims, young persons, and aboriginal offenders.
During the reporting period, the CMCRT conducted extensive public and internal CAF consultation to seek input on the subject matter areas to be reviewed and analyzed. Additionally, as part of its review, the CMCRT conducted technical visits involving consultation with foreign subject matter experts from ten countries (United States, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, and Finland). The CMCRT also took advantage of opportunities for less in-depth knowledge exchanges with military justice experts from Singapore and Israel, as part of other visits to these places that were being conducted by Office of the JAG legal officers. This comparative study by the CMCRT of how other states operate their military justice systems exposed the CMCRT to a full range of military justice considerations, structures, practices, and outcomes.
