Military Sex Cases Move to Civilian Courts

Summary#

This bill updates Canada’s military justice system. It shifts how sexual offences alleged in Canada are investigated and tried, strengthens the independence and oversight of key military justice roles, and aligns sex offender registry rules in the National Defence Act with recent Criminal Code changes. It also adds new supports and clearer rules for victims and witnesses.

• Moves investigation and prosecution of sexual offences alleged in Canada from military to civilian authorities (s.70(d)–(h), s.70.1).
• Lets victims, or someone acting for them, request a victim’s liaison officer; adds stronger duties to inform victims about publication bans (s.71.16; s.183.5; s.183.6).
• Increases independence and transparency for the Provost Marshal General, Director of Military Prosecutions, and Director of Defence Counsel Services, with fixed terms and public reporting (ss.18.3–18.6; s.165.1; s.249.18).
• Expands who can serve as a military judge and removes military judges from the summary hearing system; judges cannot be charged with service infractions (s.165.21; s.162.5; s.163(3)).
• Updates military sex offender registry orders to match Criminal Code changes, including when orders are mandatory, their duration, and how to seek exemptions or variations (ss.227–227.23; Criminal Code ss.490.04–490.06).

What it means for you#

• Households and victims

  • Sexual offences alleged in Canada involving Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members will be handled by civilian police and civilian courts, not courts martial. Military police must secure the scene and then transfer arrests and evidence to civilian authorities “as soon as feasible” (s.70(d)–(h); s.70.1; s.70.2(4)).
  • Victims can ask for a victim’s liaison officer, or have someone act on their behalf to request one. The officer explains the process and helps get information the victim has a right to receive (s.71.16(1), (3)).
  • Publication ban rules are clarified. Judges and prosecutors must inform victims and witnesses about orders, their rights, and how to vary or revoke them. Victims and witnesses may share information with trusted people (like legal or health professionals) when the purpose is not to make it public (s.183.5; s.183.6).
  • Prosecutors should not charge someone for breaching a publication ban unless the person knowingly failed to comply, another person’s privacy was compromised, and a warning is not appropriate (s.303.1(1.1)).

• CAF members

  • If accused of a sexual offence alleged in Canada, your case will proceed in the civilian system. Military police can still arrest and secure evidence before handing over to civilian police (s.70.1; s.70.2).
  • Military judges cannot face charges for service infractions. Military judges also no longer conduct summary hearings (s.162.5; s.163(3)).
  • The sex offender registry rules for court martial cases now mirror Criminal Code rules. Orders are mandatory in some cases (for example, where the victim is under 18 and a 2-year or longer sentence applies), and durations can be 10 years, 20 years, or life depending on the offence and history (s.227.01; s.227.02).

• Military police

  • You lose authority to investigate sexual offences alleged in Canada for the purpose of laying charges, except for immediate actions to stop harm, arrest, and preserve evidence pending civilian arrival (s.70.1; s.70.2).
  • You must transfer arrested persons and evidence to civilian police as soon as feasible (s.70.2(4)).
  • You must file an interference complaint if you believe someone improperly interfered with policing duties; victims or their representatives may also file such complaints (s.250.19(1), (1.1)).

• Legal professionals and accused persons in military cases

  • The Director of Military Prosecutions (DMP) and Director of Defence Counsel Services (DDCS) will have single, non-renewable 7-year terms, with possible suspension and inquiries led by a superior court judge in defined “exceptional circumstances” (s.165.1; s.165.101; s.249.18; s.249.181).
  • Eligibility to be a military judge is expanded to any officer or non-commissioned member who is a lawyer of at least 10 years’ standing and has at least 10 years of CAF service (s.165.21).
  • People under military sex offender orders made since April 15, 2011 may apply for exemption or to vary lifetime durations in certain cases. If no longer under military jurisdiction, they may apply to a civilian superior court (ss.227.22–227.23; Criminal Code ss.490.04–490.05).

• Civilian police and courts

  • You will investigate and try sexual offences alleged in Canada involving CAF members. The CAF must transfer ongoing sexual offence investigations without charges to civilian authorities within 60 days of the relevant provisions coming into force (Transitional: “Transfer of ongoing investigations”).
  • Superior courts gain jurisdiction to hear certain applications about past military sex offender orders when the applicant is not under military jurisdiction (Criminal Code s.490.04(1)(a.1), (3)(a)(ii); s.490.05(1)(a.1), (3)(a)(ii)).

• Governance and transparency

  • The Canadian Forces Provost Marshal is retitled the Provost Marshal General (PMG). The PMG must publish ministerial general instructions/guidelines and file an annual public report on military policing activities (ss.18.3–18.6).
  • The Judge Advocate General must respect the independence of military justice authorities (s.9.2(1.1)).

• Timing

  • Many parts take effect on dates set by the Governor in Council. Some provisions take effect 60 days after Royal Assent (Coming into Force (3)). Exact dates: Data unavailable.

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• Royal Recommendation: The bill carries a Governor General’s recommendation to appropriate public revenue, but it includes no dollar amounts (Preamble: “recommendation of public revenue”).
• Mandates with cost implications (no figures provided):
  • PMG annual public report (s.18.6).
  • Inquiries into DMP and DDCS by a superior court judge, including authority to hire counsel and experts, with Treasury Board–approved remuneration and expenses (s.165.101(4); s.249.181(4)).
  • Transfer of sexual offence investigations to civilian authorities within 60 days of coming into force (Transitional: “Transfer of ongoing investigations”).
  • Expanded duties for prosecutors and military judges to inform victims/witnesses and process publication ban variations (s.183.5; s.183.6; s.183.7).
  • Implementation of new appointment regimes and public posting of ministerial instructions (ss.18.5; 165.17(5)).

No publicly available fiscal note or multi-year cost estimate was identified. Specific amounts: Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Civilian handling of sexual offences alleged in Canada will improve victim confidence and consistency by using the same police and courts as the general public (s.70(d)–(h); s.70.1).
• Independence and transparency are strengthened: fixed terms, non-renewable leadership posts, and the JAG’s duty to respect independence; PMG must publish ministerial guidance and an annual report (s.9.2(1.1); ss.18.5–18.6; s.165.1; s.249.18).
• Victims get clearer rights and support: ability to request a liaison officer through a representative, mandatory information on publication bans, and simpler processes to vary or revoke orders (s.71.16; s.183.5; s.183.6; s.183.7).
• Alignment with Criminal Code sex offender rules brings clear, national standards for when registration orders are mandatory, how long they last, and how to seek relief (ss.227–227.23; Criminal Code ss.490.04–490.06).
• Removing military judges from the summary system and barring service-infraction charges against them reduces conflicts and reinforces judicial independence (s.162.5; s.163(3)).

Opponents' View#

• Shifting investigations and prosecutions to civilian systems could slow cases or create handoff problems, especially near remote bases, and may strain civilian police and courts; no resourcing plan is stated (s.70.1; Transitional transfer; costs: Data unavailable).
• The PMG is made responsible to the Minister, who may issue general instructions; critics may see a risk to perceived policing independence despite publication of instructions (s.18.5(1)–(2)).
• New suspension and inquiry powers over DMP and DDCS by the Governor in Council may chill independence, even with defined “exceptional circumstances” (s.165.1(4)–(5); s.249.18(4)–(5)).
• Complex retroactive and transitional sex offender provisions may increase administrative burden and litigation risk over exemptions, variations, and database removals (ss.227.01–227.23; Criminal Code ss.490.04–490.06).
• Publication ban duties add steps for prosecutors and judges; the limit on prosecuting ban breaches unless specific conditions are met could reduce deterrence for some violations (s.183.5; s.183.6; s.303.1(1.1)).