In Canada, the
full complement of court martial decisions prior to 2004 are stored in
paper-format in a single location: the library of the Judge Advocate
General. These court records are not available electronically or otherwise, to the general
public or to civilian military law practitioners even though they may be acting
for an accused before a court martial, facing criminal charges.
Ready access
to the JAG library is however provided to the Director of Military Prosecutions
as well as the Director Defence Services Counsel who are both immediate
subordinates of the Judge Advocate General. Presumably, the Office of the
Military Judge can also knock on the door of the Judge Advocate General to request
access to this important body of jurisprudence. We sincerely hope so since
access to court martial jurisprudence created prior to 2004 is, in my
considered opinion, crucial and central to the delivery of a fair and just
military justice system.
Be that as it
may, it is rather strange that such a key component of a judicial process, jurisprudence,
be controlled by a non-judicial body. The Office of the Chief Military Judge,
created in September 1999 currently enjoys a high level of independence in
relation to the rest of the Canadian Forces and includes a Court Martial
Administrator, military and civilian reporters and support staff. One
would think that its Registry, as the permanent administrative organ of the
Office of the Military Judge, would have actual and full control over such
judicial archives; they do not – control in Canada over (military) jurisprudence
created prior to 2004 is currently vested with the JAG. Strange indeed.
Stranger still, not only is this full body of military jurisprudence situated
outside the Canadian military courts system but its custodian, the Judge
Advocate General, has,, it appears, uninhibited discretion to decide who can have access to these jurisprudential holdings!
To use a real
world example, despite being the solicitor of record for a CF member for an
upcoming court martial trial, repeated requests to the Office of the JAG to
gain access to these pre-2004 records have been denied. In the meanwhile,
suggestions have been made that Freedom of Information (FOI) legislation should be used
to gain access to court martial decisions. In reality, because the case names
and neutral citations are only known to Canadian Forces lawyers, a civilian
practitioner is unable to even draft proper FOI requests, without knowingly
attracting enormous search fees allowable under the FOI regime.
Having a duty to safeguard the client’s right to a full defence (as guaranteed
by section 7 Charter of Rights and Freedoms) at present the only option
available to a civilian (military law) practitioner is to move a court martial
for a writ of certiorari to overturn the JAG’s decision, and seek a
court Order to perform legal research.
Only in
Canada!
Why am I not surprised to read of this. Unfair doesn't even begin to describe this process.
ReplyDelete