With Parliament's resumption this week, the Senate will consider the Conservative omnibus crime bill, C-10. In particular, amendments by the Government are expected as early as Wednesday to correct a mistake the Conservatives made in the House, a mistake which could have been avoided had the Government paid attention and respected the role of the Opposition in the legislative process.
The issue concerns the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (JVTA) -- one of the nine constituent bills of C-10, and one which has received little attention thus far. This landmark legislation would allow -- for the first time -- Canadian victims of terror to sue their terrorist perpetrators in Canadian courts.
I supported the principles of the JVTA and had even introduced similar legislation in a previous session; however, the Government's version of the bill was in need of improvement. For example, the proposed legislation would allow suits against terrorist proxies of states but not states themselves. As such, a government directly engaging in a terrorist atrocity could hide behind certain agents of its criminality and not be liable for actions it itself committed, such as Libya in the Lockerbie bombing.
To correct this and other problems with the legislation, I proposed a series of amendments at legislative committee, explaining that I sought only to strengthen the bill. All of my amendments were summarily rejected by the Conservatives, as were all opposition amendments. There was no debate or consideration; indeed, I was accused of obstruction and delay for merely suggesting these changes. In fact at the next meeting, the Government moved to shut down debate entirely.
Certainly, a majority Government has the procedural right to use its majority as it pleases. However, it ignores the opposition at its peril. Indeed, the Government eventually realized the merit of these amendments and proposed them later in the House as their own. Unfortunately for the Government, the Speaker ruled them out of order as matters that could have been dealt with at committee -- and indeed that is where they ought to have been addressed.
While we are now in a situation whereby these amendments are likely to be proposed in the Senate, this could have been avoided if the Government simply considered the amendments instead of blindly rejecting them out of pure partisanship. Changes to the legislation in the Senate will mean that the bill must still come back to the House, delaying when victims of terror may seek justice before Canadian Courts.
It is not as though I disagree with the Government here -- indeed, the wording of some of our amendments, such as those defining terrorism and support of it, are nearly identical. But, what's important to remember is that justice delayed is often justice denied -- and in this case, legislation rushed translates into justice both denied and delayed.
As Parliament resumes, the Government would do well to heed this lesson and carefully consider the proposals before it, instead of regarding the opposition and committees as but mere roadblocks.