The Chief Justice of the Court of Quebec persists and signs: her “more than justified” decision to reduce the number of days that judges sit in criminal cases will not lead to thousands of judgments in the judicial process, as Quebec fears. In a statement filed in court, Lucie Rondeau fiercely defends her reform and skins the Minister of Justice Simon Jolin-Barrette.
“The Minister has offered no solution to meet the increased needs of the Court resulting from the evolution of judicial practice […] Furthermore [le ministre] has taken no steps to advance the request for additional judicial resources,” said the Chief Justice in a 27-page affidavit filed with the Quebec Court of Appeal in late November.
Judge Rondeau and Minister Jolin-Barrette have been at loggerheads for months. Quebec is challenging in court the reform of the judges’ schedule implemented “unilaterally” by the Chief Justice this fall. This “reorganization” raises fears in Quebec of an explosion in judicial delays which risks causing an “avalanche” of judgments in the judicial process under the Jordan decision next year.
PHOTO EDOUARD PLANTE-FRÉCHETTE, LA PRESSE ARCHIVES
The Minister of Justice, Simon Jolin-Barrette, during the return to parliament
A survey of The Press revealed last month that the justice system was near “breaking point”. Court delays have exploded in the last year due to staff shortages and the reform of the Chief Justice. Many key players in the justice system thus fear the worst in 2023.
Modernization of the Siege Days Ratio
In her statement, Chief Justice Rondeau defends the legitimacy and relevance of her reform. The old formula, introduced at a time when judges rendered the vast majority of their decisions orally, had become “obsolete” and “compromised quality justice”, she argues.
For decades, the judges of the Criminal and Penal Division of the Court of Quebec sit two days for each day of deliberation (ratio 2/1).
However, since September, they sit less often, one day on the bench for one day in deliberation (ratio 1/1). A loss of approximately 4,500 hearing days. To compensate, the chief justice asks for 41 new judges, but the minister refuses.
Due to the complexity of the law, criminal and penal judges have to spend a lot of time drafting written judgments, she explains. Constitutional challenges under the Charter are also much more frequent than at the time, which increases the workload of judges.
“This heavy workload is likely to compromise the quality of criminal and penal justice if judges do not have the time necessary to accomplish it. This situation has also been decried by many colleagues for several years,” noted the Chief Justice.
“It is obvious that [les juges] felt enormous pressure and continually ran out of time,” said Associate Chief Justice Chantale Pelletier in her affidavit.
Going back wouldn’t change anything.
According to Justice Rondeau, the new ratio is a success: the judges finally expect to be “able to meet the quality requirements of criminal and penal justice”. In addition, no stoppage of the judicial process has been pronounced to date due to a lack of judges, she underlines.
It is “highly speculative,” she adds, to link the new ratio to an increased risk of process stoppages for unreasonable delays under the Jordan decision. Associate Chief Justice Pelletier adds that “nothing” suggests that this number “is likely to increase” because of the measures taken by the Court of Quebec.
On the other hand, according to Associate Chief Justice Pelletier, the return to the old ratio would not change “in any way the chronic shortage of judges”.
[Le retour en arrière préconisé par Québec] would inexorably lead to equally significant delays since the judges would not be able to perform their duties within their assignments under this ratio.
Associate Chief Justice Chantale Pelletier
Two retired judges of the Court of Quebec submitted affidavits in support of Lucie Rondeau before the Court of Appeal.
Thus, deputy judge René de la Sablonnière – and former associate chief justice from 2002 to 2009 – recounts that in the 1970s and 1980s, judges could conduct two to three trials a day and render oral decisions on the bench of 80 90% of the time. In the 2000s, judicial practice “changed considerably”, he adds.
“The 2/1 ratio has become obsolete given the modern reality of criminal and penal law,” concludes retired judge Rémi Bouchard, who was associate chief judge in 1988 of the former Court of Sessions of the Peace.
The Court of Appeal is expected to hear the litigation in 2023.