The Quebec court in matters of sexual and domestic violence is moving forward, a “first” in the world according to the Minister of Justice. Bill 92 to introduce it was adopted unanimously on Thursday.
“The train is moving. He left the station ”, rejoiced Simon Jolin-Barrette in his final remarks at the Salon Bleu.
“Quebec will be the first state in the world to set up a specialized tribunal, both in matters of sexual violence and in matters of domestic violence. It was our duty to include it in our laws, ”he added.
The study of Bill 92 ended in mid-November, during an emotional meeting in Quebec. The following steps were taken quickly when parliamentary activities resumed, until the vote on Thursday.
“Finally, it is the justice system that adapts to the reality of victims,” said PQ member Véronique Hivon, who has been involved in the matter for several years. That, in itself, is a mini revolution. “
The elected Québec solidaire Christine Labrie thanked her colleagues on Thursday for having contributed to the rewriting and revision of a bill which, when it was tabled, appeared to be “intention”.
“It doesn’t look like the version we were presented with,” she said. I really hope this will help counter the cynicism towards politics. “
Possible dispute?
Bill 92 was one of the recommendations made last December by a group of independent experts mandated to look into the reality of sexual and domestic violence. After internal government work, Minister Jolin-Barrette tabled his legislative draft in September.
The tribunal itself will not come into operation immediately. Quebec first wants to launch bills to assess the operationalization of the measure.
It remains to be seen what the Court of Quebec will do with this new institution. The Quebec court has long expressed reservations about the bill and in no way ruled out a challenge, according to the latest news.
Two weeks ago, the member of the Liberal Party of Quebec Isabelle Melançon had agreed that she “ret [enait] his breath “. “A challenge can take three to five years,” she said.
At last I heard, the Court had refrained from commenting on the current legislative process.
Further details will follow.