The Year in Review
Pursuant to subsection 9.3(2) of the National Defence Act,Footnote 1 the Judge Advocate General is required to report annually to the Minister of National Defence (the Minister) on the administration of military justice in the Canadian Armed Forces. This report covers the period from 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026.
Highlights from the Year in Military Justice
The 2025/2026 reporting period marked continued advancement in the administration of military justice and ongoing efforts to modernize the military justice system. These efforts included parliamentary consideration of amendments to the National Defence Act, notably the Military Justice System Modernization Act (Bill C-11), and other military justice-related legislative initiatives. Several developments contributed to the ongoing evolution and administration of the military justice system, including the establishment of a Service Charge Selection Policy Working Group and continued work under the Permanent Military Court Working Group (PMCWG) and the Military Judges Compensation Committee (MJCC). The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for the summary hearing process was completed. It was also recommended that the Management Action Plan (MAP) in response to the Report 3, administration of justice in the Canadian Armed Forces, of the 2018 spring reports of the Auditor General of Canada be closed. Key actions supporting its completion included enhancing the Justice Administration and Information Management System (JAIMS) to support more effective case management; and publishing the updated Military Justice System Performance Monitoring Framework (MJS-PMF) to strengthen oversight across the military justice system. Implementation of recommendations arising from independent external reviews progressed under the Comprehensive Implementation Plan (CIP), 2023–2028. Additional publications related to military justice were released to evaluate and support the accessibility and administration of the system. Further details are provided in the sections that follow.
Legislative Reform of the National Defence Act
Military Justice System Modernization Act (Bill C-11)
Throughout the 2025/2026 reporting period, the Office of the JAG supported Parliament’s consideration of Bill C-11.Footnote 2 Previously proposed as Bill C-66Footnote 3 , which died on the order paper last reporting period, Bill C-11 was introduced in the House of Commons in September 2025. Bill C-11 proposed amendments to the National Defence Act, aimed at modernizing the military justice system by responding to a number of recommendations made by the Report of the Third Independent Review Authority to the Minister of National Defence (IR3)Footnote 4 and the Report of the Independent External Comprehensive Review of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces (IECR).Footnote 5 At the end of the reporting period, Bill C-11 was at Report stage in the House of Commons. It subsequently received Royal Assent as the Military Justice System Modernization Act following the reporting period. These recommendations can be grouped into four thematic areas.
The first thematic area is the removal of the Canadian Armed Forces’ jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute Criminal Code sexual offences alleged to have been committed in Canada. The second thematic area concerns changes to the appointment of three key military justice authorities: the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal (CFPM), the Director of Military Prosecutions (DMP) and the Director of Defence Counsel Services (DDCS) as well as the provisions dealing with their tenure and removal. The third thematic area focuses on excluding military judges from the summary hearing system and expanding Victim Liaison Officers’ access under the Declaration of Victims Rights, to include those persons acting on behalf of a victim. The fourth thematic area concerns the proposed amendments to harmonize sex offender information and publication ban provisions in the National Defence Act with the 2023 amendments to the Criminal Code in the former Bill S-12.Footnote 6
Bail and Sentencing Reform Act (Bill C-14)
Throughout the 2025/2026 reporting period, the Office of the JAG was also engaged in supporting Parliament’s consideration of Bill C-14.Footnote 7 Tabled in the House of Commons in October 2025, Bill C-14 proposed amendments to the Criminal Code to strengthen bail provisions relating to repeat offending and organized crime, and to impose tougher sentences for serious and violent offences. The Bill also amends the National Defence Act to, among other things, improve the administration of military justice as it relates to sentencing by increasing the penalty for contempt; require courts martial to give primary consideration to denunciation and deterrence of offences involving criminal organizations; and create new aggravating circumstances to address repeat violent offending, offences against first responders, stealing for commercial purposes and certain property offences. At the end of the reporting period, Bill C-14 was before the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (LCJC). It subsequently received Royal Assent as the Bail and Sentencing Reform Act following the reporting period.
Protecting Victims Act (Bill C-16)
The Office of the JAG also supported Parliament’s consideration of Bill C-16.Footnote 8 The Bill was tabled in the House of Commons in December 2025. Bill C-16 proposed amendments to the Criminal Code that aim to protect victims of gender-based violence, enhancing victim’s rights and addressing trial delays. It also proposed corresponding amendments to the National Defence Act to provide testimonial aids for victims, creates a new division[FS4] on trial delay, and streamlines and strengthens procedural rules in sexual offence trials. It will also amend the Declaration of Victims Rights to align with proposed amendments to the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, reinforcing that victims have the right to be treated with respect, courtesy, compassion, and fairness. Bill C-16 also provides that victims have the right to receive information about their rights and protection measures. It also enables victims to receive information from authorities in the military justice system without being required to make a request. At the end of the reporting period, Bill C-16 was before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights (JUST). It subsequently received Royal Assent as the Protecting Victims Act following the reporting period.
Combatting Hate Act (Bill C-9)
Throughout the 2025/2026 reporting period, the Office of the JAG remained actively engaged in matters related to Parliament’s consideration of Bill C-9, tabled on 19 September 2025.Footnote 9 Bill C-9 amended the Criminal Code to strengthen Canada’s response to hate-motivated conduct. Bill C‑9 created new hate-related offences, including a specific hate crime offence for conduct motivated by hatred toward an identifiable group based on characteristics such as race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation or gender identity or expression. It also created offences relating to the wilful promotion of hatred against an identifiable group through the public display of certain terrorism or hate symbols, as well as the intimidation of persons and the obstruction or interference with lawful access to religious, cultural, educational, and community spaces used by identifiable groups. Persons subject to the Code of Service Discipline who commit one of these offences may be charged with a service offence under section 130 of the National Defence Act. At the end of the reporting period, Bill C-9 was at Second Reading at the Senate. Following the reporting period, the Bill received Royal Assent on 18 June 2026 and became the Combatting Hate Act.
Service Charge Selection Policy Working Group
During the reporting period, the Judge Advocate General established a working group to examine the process by which disciplinary incidents are triaged and referred to the Canadian Military Prosecution Service (CMPS) for assessment of court martial suitability. Participants in the working group include representatives from CMPS, the Military Justice Division, the Military Justice Modernization Division, the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal, and the Regional Services Division.
The working group developed a number of recommendations and initiated work to update or develop policies related to the application of public interest criteria in decisions to convene a court martial. The initiative supports a consistent and principled approach across the Canadian Armed Forces to determining whether misconduct should be addressed through the summary hearing system or the court martial system. It will inform a new Judge Advocate General Policy Directive on the provision of disciplinary legal advice, which is currently in development.
The Permanent Military Court Working Group
In response to Recommendation 5 of the IR3, which recommended the creation of a permanent military court for the Canadian Armed Forces to increase the perception of independence, improve efficiency and reduce delays associated with the ad hoc nature of courts martial, the Permanent Military Court Working Group (PMCWG) was established in late 2022. The PMCWG was established to identify the most effective framework for the creation of such a court under s. 101 of the Constitution Act, 1867.Footnote 10 The PMCWG is a joint endeavour between the Office of the JAG and the Department of Justice Canada and includes an Independent Authority, whose background is in court administration. Its work consists of undertaking consultations, developing legal opinions, considering options for the establishment of the new court, and producing a report to the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Justice. During the 2025/2026 reporting period, the Working Group convened 12 times, conducted extensive in-person and written consultations with representatives from the military and federal judiciaries, military and federal judicial governance and administration bodies, and senior Canadian Armed Forces leadership including the Chief of the Defence Staff, and began drafting its report. The report is intended to be delivered to the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Justice during the 2026/2027 reporting period.
Military Judges Compensation Committee
The Military Judges Compensation Committee (MJCC) is a body created by Parliament to ensure an independent, objective, and depoliticized process for inquiring into the adequacy of military judicial compensation. The MJCC, mandated under the National Defence Act to submit recommendations to the Minister every four years, performs a similar role and operates according to similar legal principles as its civilian counterpart, the Judicial Compensation and Benefits Commission. In making recommendations on the remuneration level for military judges, the MJCC considers factors such as the need to attract highly qualified candidates to the Bench, the necessity of ensuring judicial independence, and the prevailing economic conditions in Canada.Footnote 11 The MJCC delivered its report to the Minister on 31 January 2024 and, on 31 July 2024, the Minister accepted the report’s recommendations.
Regulatory amendments to implement the recommendations of the previous MJCC inquiry for the 2019 to 2023 period were approved by the Treasury Board of Canada in March 2026. Work also progressed to support the establishment of the next MJCC, tasked with making recommendations regarding military judges’ compensation for the period from 2023 to 2027. As of the date of submission of this report, the Minister’s nominee has been working with the nominee of the military judges to select a chairperson nominee, whereupon the three MJCC members will be recommended for appointment to their roles by the Governor in Council.
Completion of a Privacy Impact Assessment
Although a PIA was undertaken by the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces in relation to the introduction of JAIMS in 2021/2022, it did not include a comprehensive assessment of personal information handling practices associated with the summary hearings process. Subsequent changes to policies, procedures, and business practices introduced to support the new summary hearing process constituted a substantial program change, creating an appropriate opportunity to conduct a program level PIA in relation to summary hearings. The PIA identified opportunities to strengthen privacy practices, which were addressed by the Office of the JAG’s Military Justice Division as part of the assessment process.
Completion of the Management Action Plan
During the reporting period, it was assessed that the actions identified in the Management Action Plan (MAP), developed in response to the Report 3, administration of justice in the Canadian Armed Forces, of the 2018 spring reports of the Auditor General of CanadaFootnote 12 , had been implemented, and closure of the MAP was recommended. The recommendation reflected the Office of the JAG’s assessment that the objectives identified in the MAP had been achieved. This assessment was supported by broader modernization efforts within the military justice system, notably the implementation of JAIMS, a review of military police report disclosure practices, the re-establishment of the Military Justice Round Table and the updated MJS-PMF.
These complementary initiatives contributed to the achievement of the MAP’s objectives by enhancing case management capabilities, strengthening oversight mechanisms, and improving the timeliness and transparency of military justice processes.
The Comprehensive Implementation Plan 2023-2028
Throughout the reporting period, implementation of recommendations arising from IR3 and the IECR continued as part of the CIP. The CIP is a multi-year plan that prioritizes, structures, and harmonizes initiatives across the Defence Team to create a more open, transparent, and accountable approach to culture change and military justice modernization.Footnote 13 The CIP incorporates recommendations from four key external review reports: the IR3,Footnote 14 the IECR,Footnote 15 the Minister’s Advisory Panel on Systemic Racism and Discrimination Report,Footnote 16 and the National Apology Advisory Committee Report.Footnote 17
As part of the CIP, the Office of the JAG is the lead organization for the implementation of 77 recommendations across all phases and supports other organizations in advancing numerous additional recommendations.
During the reporting period, six recommendations for which the Office of the JAG is the lead were fully implemented.Footnote 18 By the end of the reporting period, a total of 11 Office of the JAG-led recommendations had been fully implemented . Shortly after the end of the reporting period, the Military Justice System Modernization Act received Royal Assent. Once the relevant provisions are brought into force, IECR recommendation 5, the removal of Criminal Code sexual offences from the Canadian armed forces jurisdiction, will be addressed. In addition, a further eight Office of the JAG-led IR3 recommendations will be implemented on dates to be established by the Governor in Council. The Office of the JAG continues to plan and work towards implementing all recommendations; however, many require legislative amendments and are subject to legislative prioritization established by the Government of Canada.
Justice Administration and Information Management System
The 2025/2026 reporting period marked the first full year in which the Justice Administration and Information Management System (JAIMS) was used across the Canadian Armed Forces to support the administration of disciplinary matters. JAIMS provides commanders with timely and reliable information by electronically tracking the lifecycle of disciplinary cases at the unit level. In doing so, it enhances case management, promotes consistency in the administration of military justice, and supports the Judge Advocate General in fulfilling their statutory responsibility to superintend the administration of military justice.
During the reporting period, 1,679 disciplinary cases were recorded in JAIMS, and 595 summary hearings proceeded. In many other cases, units determined that no further disciplinary proceedings were warranted due to factors such as insufficient evidence, the absence of a service infraction, a lack of public interest, or the use of alternative administrative measures. As this was the first full reporting period following the Canadian Armed Forces implementation of JAIMS, a small number of records remain subject to ongoing data-quality review and validation.
Ongoing support for users is provided through the JAIMS Centre of Excellence, which assists units in administering disciplinary cases and promotes consistent use of the system across the Canadian Armed Forces. During the reporting period, several enhancements were implemented to improve usability and user experience, while additional upgrades are underway to strengthen reporting capabilities and support military justice performance monitoring initiatives.
Summary Hearings and Discipline in Deployed Environment
A functioning military justice system supports discipline, efficiency, and morale, all of which are foundational to operational readiness and mission success. In operational environments, where timely and effective disciplinary measures are often critical, the military justice system provides the chain of command with an essential tool to maintain discipline.
During the reporting period, a total of 105 summary hearings were conducted in operational environments, including during operations such as Operation REASSURANCE in Latvia and on board His Majesty’s Canadian Ships. This demonstrates the continued reliance on the summary hearing process in deployed and operational contexts. The effective administration and tracking of service infractions, supported in part by JAIMS, promotes transparency, consistency, and accountability in the handling of these matters.
Military Justice System Performance Monitoring Framework
The 2025/2026 reporting period marked the transition of the updated MJS-PMFFootnote 19 from development to full implementation. The MJS-PMF provides objective quantitative and meaningful qualitative data through a focused set of key performance indicators designed to assess the effectiveness, efficiency, and legitimacy of the military justice system. In support of the Judge Advocate General’s role as superintendent of the administration of military justice, the framework enables ongoing monitoring of system performance, identification of trends and areas requiring attention, the development of benchmarks, and the assessment of the impact of legislative and policy changes, while enhancing transparency for policymakers and the public.
The updated MJS-PMF reflects changes introduced by Bill C-77, An Act to amend the National Defence Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts,Footnote 20 and organizes performance indicators across inputs, outputs and outcomes covering key aspects of the military justice process. Implemented through JAIMS, the framework draws on administrative and survey data related to case flow, timeliness, review and appeal activity, access to justice considerations, and perceptions of fairness and confidence in the system. Following its approval by the Judge Advocate General and publication, the updated MJS-PMF now serves as the foundation for ongoing performance monitoring [VP27] of the military justice system, as well as future reporting.
Military Justice at the Unit Level Post-Case User Experience Survey
The Military Justice at the Unit Level Post-Case User Experience Survey establishes a qualitative baseline of stakeholder experiences under the updated MJS-PMF framework. This baseline supports ongoing monitoring of how system actors perceive and experience the administration of Military Justice at the Unit Level following the completion of a case. This initiative contributes to the MJS-PMF by tracking trends in stakeholder experiences over time, enabling the early identification of emerging issues, shifts in perceptions, and opportunities for targeted improvements. It also supports the Department of National Defence’s response to key external reviews.
The survey focuses on Military Justice at the Unit Level actors and provides insight into the day-to-day operation of the summary hearing system and its practical administration impacts. Data collection and analysis are aligned with the reporting period to ensure consistency and comparability with existing reporting mechanisms. By establishing a qualitative baseline of stakeholder experiences, the survey enhances transparent, evidence-based evaluation of the military justice system and supports ongoing performance monitoring and improvement. The Military Justice at the Unit Level Post-Case User Experience Survey was implemented at the end of the reporting period, in March 2026, to support data collection at the start of the subsequent reporting period.
Deprivation of Pay
As reported in the 2024/2025 Annual Report, the processing of the sanction of deprivation of pay within the Canadian Armed Forces was placed on hold in the summer of 2023 to ensure its consistent administration at the unit level. In May 2025, following joint efforts of the Military Justice Division and the Director General Compensation and Benefits, the Chief of the Defence Staff issued direction on the calculation and implementation of the sanction. This direction enabled the hold on processing the deprivation to be lifted, allowing immediate implementation of the sanction. Throughout the reporting period, efforts continued to address all cases affected by this issue, including the correction of previously administered sanctions and the implementation of sanctions that have been delayed as a result of the processing hold.
Evaluation of the Military Justice Training Programs
An Evaluation Report on the Military Justice and Grievance Training Programs, conducted by the Assistant Deputy Minister (Review Services) on behalf of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, was completed and published during this reporting period.Footnote 21 Covering the period from 2019/2020 to 2024/2025, the report addressed recommendations arising from the IR3 and provided a comprehensive assessment of training across the Canadian Armed Forces. It reaffirmed the importance of Military Justice at the Unit Level training as a foundational component of military justice education and highlighted how this training equips personnel with the knowledge and skills required to administer the military justice system effectively while fostering a broader understanding of military justice.
The evaluation identified increased awareness of and access to training, while also noting opportunities to strengthen knowledge retention and support ongoing proficiency among personnel. These findings will inform continued improvements to training and support the effective administration of Military Justice at the Unit Level.
Court Martial Appeal Court: Operational Capacity
The Judge Advocate General continues to observe that the number of judges designated or appointed to the Court Martial Appeal Court has declined in recent years, from more than 60 historically to 22 in the current reporting period. An adequate complement of judges remains important to support the timely and efficient hearing of appeals in both official languages.
Publications Supporting Administration of Military Justice
During the reporting period, several publications were released to support the military justice actors in the conduct of their tasks and improve access to information about the military justice system for Canadian Armed Forces members. These publications included an updated version of the Code of Service Discipline and Me,Footnote 22 the Assisting Member Aide-Memoire,Footnote 23 and the Review Authority Aide-MemoireFootnote 24 .
Conclusion
In exercising superintendence over the military justice system, the Judge Advocate General continues to support the Government of Canada, the Department of National Defence, and the Canadian Armed Forces as it evolves. Throughout the reporting period, the Office of the JAG continued to monitor institutional capacity across the military justice system to ensure that key organizations are positioned to meet current and future operational requirements.
The military justice system continued to evolve alongside broader changes in Canada and the needs of the Canadian Armed Forces. The Office of the JAG efforts remain focused on enhancing fairness, efficiency, and the system’s ability to meet the demands of military discipline, guided by a commitment to the rule of law, the protection of participants’ rights, and the operational needs of the Canadian Armed Forces.
Fiat Justitia
Robin F. Holman, MSM, CD
Major-General