Defence Counsel Services seeks leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada re: independence of military judges

 The Canadian Press reports that Defence Counsel Services, the office that provides representation, free of charge, to Canadian Forces personnel prosecuted before courts martial, has sought leave to appeal the judgment of the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada in R v Edwards, et. al., 2021 CMAC 2. 

The Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada was unanimous in their judgment; consequently, the accused in those courts martial (who were the respondents on appeal) cannot appeal the judgment 'as of right'.  They must first seek leave of the Supreme Court of Canada to bring such an appeal.

If leave to appeal is granted, this will be the first time since R v Généreux, [1992] 1 SCR 259, that the independence of military judges has been brought before Canada's apex court as the central issue on appeal.  After a fashion, this would represent the closing of a cycle of judgments on judicial independence generally.  Key early cases regarding the independence of the civilian judiciary under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Valente v The Queen, [1985] 2 SCR 673 and The Queen v Beauregard, [1986] 2 SCR 56 - relied (in part) upon a pre-Charter Supreme Court of Canada judgment that examined the independence of (then) 'Judge Advocates' and courts martial: MacKay v The Queen, [1980] 2 SCR 370.  While the Supreme Court of Canada is not obliged to hear the proposed appeal, there is much to entice the Court to grant leave.