ࡱ> jliz @ Qbjbj00 RbRbbD}!@F0",",",8Z, f-W.$.^...000VVVVVVV$LYR[V=00"==Vvv..V(???=^v.v8.V?=V??}SvT.. Nn",1> TV$$WW!TV\>V\(TvvvvV\T04?J7,v9]000VV^ ?"^ Submission on the elimination of the Court Challenges Program November 6, 2006 Hearing of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Ottawa (Ontario) Ken Norman, Treasurer, Court Challenges Program of Canada November 3, 2006 Purpose of the Court Challenges Program: Access to justice The rationale for the fund lies in the fact that access to justice requires resources For sound civil society reasons, there are a number of government funding programs founded on this same rationale. The Court Challenges Program (Program) was but one of such programs. One year ago, a Canadian delegation appeared before the United Nations Human Rights Committee during the review of Canadas Fifth Report on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Focussing only on Charter challenges and leaving to one side such litigation funding programs as the Test Case Funding Program of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and the Aboriginal Rights Court Challenges Program of the NWT, the Canadian delegation explained the various circumstances in which Charter issues may arise during government funded litigation. It offered examples such as criminal legal aid, civil litigation involving government or quasi-government actors, and individuals engaged in litigation with government actors over rights and access issues. The Canadian report proceeded to note that: the Department of Canadian Heritage also funds the Court Challenges Program (CCP), which provides financial assistance for test cases of national significance in order to clarify the rights of the official language minority communities and the equality rights of disadvantaged groups. In this light, what sense can be made of Treasury Board President John Bairds comment justifying the funding chop to the Court Challenges Program, on September 25, 2006, that I just dont think it made sense for the government to subsidize lawyers to challenge the governments own laws in court? I come before you to ask that this singling-out of the Court Challenges Program be reversed. In the name of access to justice, we ask this Committee to call for the restoration of funding to the Court Challenges Program. I will now speak to the Programs record of accomplishments. A Brief History The Program was first established in 1978 following important language rights cases that were pursued in the courts by individuals at great financial cost and personal expense. In view of the fundamental importance of the rights in question, it was recognized that there was a need for a program that would assist individuals from the official minority language rights groups in bringing forward cases to clarify their constitutional language rights whenever government legislation, policies and/or practices denied or blocked these rights. It was understood that there needed to be a mechanism though which these groups could have their rights recognized. Without such a mechanism, members of these groups would have little or no voice in seeing their rights recognized and respected. When the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted in 1982, the mandate of the Program was expanded to include language rights under the Charter. In 1985, the equality provisions of the Charter came into effect, and the Programs mandate was further expanded to include equality rights cases. In sum, the Program was meant to provide access to justice for Canadas historically disadvantaged those who are most vulnerable to marginalization and exclusion from full participation in Canadian society and Canadas official minority language groups, who are also trying to claim their full and proper place in Canada. Without this access to justice, these disempowered groups and individuals will no longer have a voice in their efforts to seek equality and recognition. Thus, there is no weight to the argument that the Program somehow failed in its mandate when it did not grant funding to those status quo groups seeking to intervene in support of the governments position. Accountability of government The Charter is a constitutional document designed to provide better protection for Canadians fundamental rights and freedoms. It has supreme stature to ensure that the rights articulated therein could not be ignored and that governments could be held accountable to Canadians. The Court Challenges Program has over the years offered a voice in the debate on the scope and nature of language and equality rights to individuals and groups, which would otherwise not be able to bring these issues to court. While governments reflect the will of the majority, the courtroom is a venue in which minority rights and the interest of the disenfranchised are recognized. A vibrant democracy needs both of these institutions to function well  Criteria for funding In designing the Program, certain criteria were put in place to ensure the most effective and efficient use of allocated public funds. These criteria remained substantively the same over the years. The 2004 Contribution Agreement signed between Canadian Heritage and the Court Challenges Program of Canada (CCPC) clearly set out the objective of the Program: to clarify constitutional official language and equality rights to achieve a better understanding, respect for, and enjoyment of human rights. These objectives form the basis of the criteria used when determining whether an application for funding falls within the mandate/objective of the Court Challenges Program. Other criteria set out in the Contribution Agreement include: the requirement that the cases funded must be of national significance that there be financial need, and that duplication is to be avoided. In addition, there are restrictions that prevent the Program from funding applications relating to complaints under the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Official Languages Act. Further, the funding of equality rights issues is limited to federal laws, policies and/or practices only. Value & Effectiveness 2006 review? In cutting the Court Challenges Program, the government said that it did not provide value for money. We would be very interested to know on what basis this assertion was made. The Program was never notified that it was undergoing a review neither staff nor Board members were contacted and asked for any information about the Program. So, what was the nature of the review? What were its findings? Upon announcing the cut, the government did not tie its decision to any supposed findings of any such review. Formal reviews 1997 and 2003 In fact the Court Challenges Program was reviewed -- twice. Each time its Contribution Agreement came up for renewal, the Program was subjected to an extensive, thorough review by an outside independent body. Both times, it was found to be effective and accountable providing Canadian taxpayers with value for their money. - Quotes from the 1997 Evaluation Since its inception, the Program has supported many cases that have made an important contribution to constitutional law. For example, the Program has been involved in almost all of the litigation across the country surrounding educational rights for minority official language communities. On the equality side, the Program has sponsored several cases that were unsuccessful in the courts but raised awareness of the issue and ultimately resulted in changes in the law. Many important constitutional cases would not have proceeded without financial support from the Program. The importance of the Programs financial assistance on cases is undisputed. Many of the Programs applicants would unable to mount their challenges or conduct their consultations without the Programs support. For many, the Program is the only source of funding available to them. - Quotes from the 2003 Evaluation The evaluation indicates that the Court Challenges Program addresses the need that led to the Programs creation. The activities of the Program are consistent with strategic objectives established by the Department [of Heritage] in April 2000, particularly those relating to citizens engagement and the promotion of official languages. The evaluation findings suggest that there are dimensions of the constitutional provisions covered by the Program that still require clarification and that, most probably, there will continue to be dimensions of the constitutional provisions that require clarification indefinitely. [emphasis added] The evidence collected indicates that the Program has an effective management structure in place, and that the procedures followed to review applications and allocate funding do reflect good practices in that field. The Program has been successful in reaching out to members of linguistic minorities and disadvantaged Canadians The Program has also been successful in supporting important court cases that have had a direct impact on the implementation of rights and freedoms covered by the Program. The evaluation indicates that many of these court cases would never have been brought to the attention of the Courts without the Program Additional points to consider: The Program, which has a national scope, is wholly administered by a small staff of eight people from a single office in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The administrative budget is relatively small when considering the importance of the issues funded and the national scope of the Program. Only $525,000 is allocated to Language Rights cases and $1, 575,000 to Equality Rights cases each year. This amount covers an average of 123 applications for Equality Rights funding and an average of 35 applications for Language Rights funding. A quick calculation demonstrates the limited nature of the amounts available for the number of applications received. Further, under the limitations established by the CCPC in administering funds, the real costs of taking a case forward are not fully covered. However, the limited funding that is granted allows applicants to leverage the participation of very skilled and experienced lawyers who agree to work at a much lower hourly rate for some of the work and on a pro bono basis for another portion of the work in order to participate in important test cases. Impact of the Program The funding provided under the Program to numerous groups has been an effective tool in advancing human rights in Canada in both areas in which it provides funding. Its impact can be measured in a number of ways. Many of the cases which it has funded have established important precedents in Canadian constitutional law. One of many such cases is Doucet-Boudreau, a Nova-Scotia case involving the section 23 education rights of the Acadian minority in that province. Funded at the three levels, this case reached the Supreme Court of Canada, which upheld the trial level decision permitting more effective oversight of the governments implementation of these rights which the court found had not been effectively enforced since the advent of the Charter in 1982. Other examples can be cited of cases which have made an important contribution to the rights of official language minorities in Canada. For example: Montfort Hospital: the further elaboration and recognition of an unwritten constitutional principle of the protection of minorities (first elaborated in the Qubec Secession Reference); the court recognized that governments must consider the impact their actions might have on official language minorities before acting. In Arsenault-Cameron v. Prince Edward Island, the Supreme Court confirmed the important principle of substantive equality and its application in s. 23 cases. It stated that: Section 23 is premised on the fact that substantive equality requires that official language minorities be treated differently, if necessary, according to their particular circumstances and needs, in order to provide them with a standard of education equivalent to that of the official language majority. R. v. Beaulac; important case regarding how language rights should be interpreted. the establishment of adequate educational facilities equal to those of the majority, in many provinces and territories (Saskatchewan, Alberta, Manitoba; PEI, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, NWT). As indicated in the 1997 evaluation of the Program, however, success cannot only be measured by the number of winning cases. For example, contrary to the perception of some, ...equality challenges have rarely produced clear wins at the hands of the legal system. Funding from the Program provides equality-seekers with an opportunity to keep their issues before the courts in the hope that over time the legal principles which they advance will be recognized by the courts. Furthermore, the issues brought before the courts can help to raise the profile of certain issues which can stimulate public debate and lead to legislative reform which advances human rights. The Program provides the least powerful in society (disadvantaged groups) with a means to continue the dialogue which they would otherwise not have. Accountability of the Court Challenges Program of Canada Accountability for public funds The issue of accountability was fully studied and considered during the independent evaluation of the Program that was completed in February of 2003. The evaluation noted that the Court Challenges Program of Canada regularly reports to Canadian Heritage with regard to its activities as well as has annual audits of its financial accounts completed by an independent firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers. The CCPCs annual reports include these audited financial statements. The Court Challenges Program of Canada firmly believes in accountability, and in the spirit of enhancing the information already being provided, the CCPC suggested additional information that could enhance the accountability to Canadian Heritage and the government. These suggestions were incorporated into the 2004 Contribution Agreement. Accountability for recipients of Program funding The Court Challenges Program of Canada does not immediately disclose the names of each applicant for reasons of solicitor-client privilege. The funding provided under the Court Challenges Program is very similar to that provided under a Legal Aid program where it is not possible to receive information about the names of Legal Aid recipients for reasons of privacy and solicitor-client privilege. Further, we refer to a recent Supreme Court of Canada ruling in Goodis v. Ontario (Ministry of Correctional Services) [2006] S.C.J. No 31, which upholds the importance of solicitor-client privilege and considers it to be a part of procedural fairness. To enhance full accountability, the Court Challenges Program of Canada regularly requests authorization from its applicants to release and publish their information, and whenever such authorization is granted, does so. In this regard, the Court Challenges Program of Canada publishes an annual report that identifies key cases that were funded under the Program during the fiscal year in question. Moreover, the annual report provides full statistical information that identifies the number and types of applications received, the number and types of cases that were funded, as well as the amount of monies that were granted in each category of funding listed in the Contribution Agreement. Every penny that the Court Challenges Program of Canada receives is fully accounted and disclosed in this report. Each of the Court Challenges Program of Canadas annual reports, from the first one in 1994 to the most recent one, are available in full upon request and are also posted online on our website at  HYPERLINK "http://www.ccppcj.ca" www.ccppcj.ca, from which they can be downloaded. Final Points The important and unique contribution of the Program has been recognized internationally by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which noted at paragraph 13 of its Concluding Observations: The Committee, while noting the State partys Court Challenges Program, regrets that this Program has not been extended to permit funding with respect to challenges to provincial and territorial legislation and policies, as previously recommended by the Committee. Further, at paragraph 42: The Committee reiterates its recommendation that the State party extend the Court Challenges Programme to permit funding of challenges with respect to provincial and territorial legislation and policies.  In addition, the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mrs. Mary Robinson, commented on the wonderful work of the Court Challenges Program and the uniqueness of such a program during her acceptance speech of an honorary Doctorate from the University of Winnipeg. She also stated that this type of Program should be replicated in other countries. The Charter has been in existence for a generation. However, constitutional rights continue to evolve. One only has to look to the United States where constitutional rights continue to be raised in the courts 200 years after a bill of rights was entrenched in the American constitution. Surely, there is a continuing need for our Program. All of which is respectfully submitted, Ken Norman ____________________ Ken Norman, Treasurer, Court Challenges Program of Canada  Professor Lorne Sossin, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, Toronto Star, September 28, 2006.  Supplement to the Report of Canada, October 24, 2005, at p. 20.  Ibid., p. 21.  Sossin, supra, note 1.  Evaluation of the Court Challenges Program, 1997.  Summative Evaluation of the Court Challenges Program, 2003  Ibid., p. 53.  Ibid.  Ibid., p. 54.  United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 36th session Concluding Observations. Available at:  HYPERLINK "http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/cescrs36.htm" http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/cescrs36.htm, Accessed November 3, 2006. Page  PAGE 7.  294, av. Portage, pice 616, Winnipeg, (Manitoba) R3C 0B9 294 Portage Ave., Suite 616, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3C 0B9 Tlphone: (204) 942-0022 Tlcopieur: (204) 946-0669 Phone: (204) 942-0022 Fax: (204) 946-0669 Site:  HYPERLINK http://www.ccppcj.ca http://www.ccppcj.ca lectronique:  HYPERLINK mailto:info@ccppcj.ca info@ccppcj.ca Web site:  HYPERLINK http://www.ccppcj.ca http://www.ccppcj.ca E-mail:  HYPERLINK mailto:info@ccppcj.ca info@ccppcj.ca  EMBED MSGraph.Chart.8 \s  EFGXYhл~~k~k~[~[kF(h;3h>rF5B*CJaJmH phsH h;3B*CJ$aJ$mH phsH %h;3hB*CJ$aJ$mH phsH %h;3hB*CJ$aJ$mH phsH (h;3h5B*CJ$aJ$mH phsH (h;3h5B*CJ$aJ$mH phsH (h;3h5B*CJaJmH phsH .h;35B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH .h5B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH pppppppFEƀr;rgdI$Eƀr;ra$gdjbLNPQFGXYgNEƀr;r^`gd;3JEƀr;r^gdllllllFEƀr;rgdM$Eƀr;r^a$gd   0 1 2 跡rZB-(h'}ihnCJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}ih=!5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}ihn5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH 1h>rFhB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h>rFB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h;3B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h>rFh>rFB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH .h5B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH .h>rF5B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH lM$Eƀr;r^a$gdFEƀr;rgd1 ppppFEƀr;rgd>rFI$Eƀr;ra$gdj1 2 E F Z [ mmmI$Eƀr;ra$gdjI$Eƀr;ra$gd=!2 3 E F   1 ; = ӺhOOh6h1h'}ihuB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihk5B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihf~{B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH >jh'}ih(`0JB*CJOJQJU^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih(`B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihjB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h'}ih=!>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH +h'}ih]J>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH  = ? W [ i j " 4 ; 洞mT9T4h}h6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h'}ih]a6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hjh'}ih0JB*CJOJQJU^JaJmH phsH +hjh'}ihj,'0JB*CJOJQJU^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihTB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihj,'B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hVB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih(`B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih5hB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hrB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih5RB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihG|EB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihuB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH !"mmI$Eƀr;ra$gd$OI$Eƀr;ra$gdj  "JS\|淞pWWWWAW+h}B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih/B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihWB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH )h'}ihWB*CJOJQJ^JaJph1hhGB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihGB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih]JB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH  !X_!*2зrr\E*4h'}ih$O6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH ,h'}ih@!6B*CJOJQJ^JaJph+h"|dB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hrB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih\CiB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hcB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih.B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h'}ih6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihuB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH   %CKw/1ʱlS:1h'}ih5hB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih[B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hEB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih#wB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h}B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h}h5h6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h}h 6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH  123ʹ{`E*4h'}ih\Ci>*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h'}ih"z>*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h'}ih5h>*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH >jh'}ih5h0JB*CJOJQJU^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihy<B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih5hB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih"zB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih$OB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH  mmmmmI$Eƀr;ra$gd=!I$Eƀr;ra$gdj -.NOVͷͷ͞lSlS:S1h'}ih B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih({B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih=!B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih]JB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih$OB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hVB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihGB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih\CiB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH )Hdejk "+BзpWWpWW<<4h'}ih=!6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihk*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH )h'}ihk*B*CJOJQJ^JaJph1h'}ihCB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih=!B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihD/B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih({B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +hEB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH HkiiI$Eƀr;ra$gdk*L$ & FEƀr;ra$gdk* !!""G#H#k#l#% $h^ha$gd[$a$gd-M$a$gd"GI$Eƀr;ra$gdj/!2!T!!!־veSB1B1B h'}ihjGCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih"GCJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ih"G>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih=!CJOJQJ^JaJ.h'}ih=!5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}ih\Ci5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}ihj5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}iha315>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH (hV5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH (hc5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH !!!!!!"&")"""" #G#H#J#K#i#j#k#l#&ᾬቾw`wN= h'}ih-MCJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ih-M5CJOJQJ^JaJ-jh'}ih[0JCJOJQJU^JaJ#h'}ih-M>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih1NCJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ih"G6CJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ih"G>*CJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ih1N>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihjGCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih"GCJOJQJ^JaJhECJOJQJ^JaJ%%&&&&G(H(w)x)T*U*+,, ,,,8-9-..f0$a$gd[a$a$gdRd $^a$gd"G$a$gd-M $h^ha$gd[ $h^ha$gd-M&&&&&&&&&&&'-'''D(E(H(I(V)b)d)t)u)v)x)y)P*оtfX򅬅F#h'}ih"G6CJOJQJ^JaJh]mCJOJQJ^JaJhECJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihuCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih"GCJOJQJ^JaJ*jh[0J>*CJOJQJU^JaJ#h'}ih"G>*CJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ih1N>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih-MCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih[CJOJQJ^JaJh[CJOJQJ^JaJP*Q*U*V***+++++++,,+,9,G,H,----O.S.[.e.......b//ᮜ}}l}l[}[}[[}[}[ h'}ih[aCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihCJOJQJ^JaJhECJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihRdCJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ihRd>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihcCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih%CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihuCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih"GCJOJQJ^JaJh[CJOJQJ^JaJ"/00000f0g0h0n0}0~000T1U1V1112̾tctUGt5t#h'}ih-M6CJOJQJ^JaJhoRCJOJQJ^JaJh[CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihuCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih-MCJOJQJ^JaJ&h'}ih"G5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h'}ih-M5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihVCJOJQJ^JaJh"GCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihRdCJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ihRd6CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihKMCJOJQJ^JaJf0g0h0~00T1U1}3~344W5X566:7;777 $8^8a$gd-M $p^pa$gd-M $h^ha$gd-M $8^8a$gd? $ & Fa$gd-M$a$gd?$a$gdE$a$gd-M $^a$gd"G22!313k3r3~33444444V5W5X5[555~eIe7h'}ih-M6B*CJOJQJ]^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih-MB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih?B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h?h-MB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH  h'}ihG|ECJOJQJ^JaJhoRCJOJQJ^JaJ#h'}ih-M6CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih-MCJOJQJ^JaJh?CJOJQJ^JaJ55:7h8i8k8l8888u9v99999: ;;;~;;;;;п{{j{\K h'}ihVCJOJQJ^JaJh-MCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihG|ECJOJQJ^JaJ-jh'}ih-M0JCJOJQJU^JaJ h'}ihuCJOJQJ^JaJh?CJOJQJ^JaJh;3CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih-MCJOJQJ^JaJ1h'}ih-MB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h?B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 7j8k8;;;;;<NNI$Eƀr;ra$gd({I$Eƀr;ra$gdj$a$gd? $h^ha$gd-M $ & Fa$gd-M;;;;;;;<<<<иoT;"o1h'}ih=B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihG;pB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h'}ihG;p>*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih({B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH .h'}ih=!5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}ih/5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}ih\Ci5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}ihj5>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH .h'}iha315>*CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH  <<==-?.?_?`?AA~CCEE4F6F7FFFGFI$a$gdLj$a$gdVI$Eƀr;ra$gd({<<===g>i>r>>>>>>>>> ? ?(?+?-?.?зТt[B[t[[[1h'}ihVB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih\CiB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih/B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH )h'}ih/B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h'}ihVB*CJOJQJ^JaJph1h'}ih2(B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih({B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h?B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH .?O?V?_?`?a?????0AeAAAAGBHBWB屘dO:)h'}ihVB*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h'}ih({B*CJOJQJ^JaJph4h'}ih({6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih({B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihVB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihG;pB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h'}ihu>*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h'}ihG;p>*B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH WBkBBBBB}CCEEEEEFFFFFF&F3FкССЃbK,h'}ih({0JCJOJQJ^JaJmH sH @jh'}ih({B*CJOJQJU^JaJmH phsH :jh'}ih({B*CJOJQJU^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ihG;pB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h#)B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih({B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h?B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 3F4F5F6F7F=FBFCFFFGFtF{FFFFͷyyhWFW5'h%YoCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihKMCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihuCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih%CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihVCJOJQJ^JaJ&h'}ihV5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h'}ihKM5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ+hVB*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH +h({B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih({B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih2(B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH FFFFFFF/H:HIIII)JUJVJkJ~JJJﲛ|iX|Jh>rFCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih;3CJOJQJ^JaJ$h'}ihX!0JCJOJQJ^JaJh;3CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihX!CJOJQJ^JaJ-jh'}ihKM0JCJOJQJU^JaJ$h'}ihKM0JCJOJQJ^JaJh"|dCJOJQJ^JaJh?CJOJQJ^JaJh%YoCJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ihKMCJOJQJ^JaJIIJJKKKKKKKKKLLL'L3LaL$a$gd#}I$Eƀr;ra$gd /$a$gd$a$gdLjJJJJJKKKKKLLLaLbLcLLLLL槙whWwPFB=B6 h(`hT hT6hTjhT0JU h'}ih>rF hD{Rh#}CJOJQJ^JaJh#}5CJ$OJQJ^JaJ$ h'}ih#}CJOJQJ^JaJ h'}ih"|dCJOJQJ^JaJhcCJOJQJ^JaJh"|dCJOJQJ^JaJ+h /B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 4h'}ih /6B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH 1h'}ih /B*CJOJQJ^JaJmH phsH aLbLLMM1MeMMMMMNNNNNNNiOOP $ !ra$gd>rFgd$a$gd  !&gd: 7$8$H$gdKMgd-Mgd[gd$a$gd#}LLM M MMMMM1M2M3McMdMeMfMMMMMMMMMMMMMMNNN2N3NBNCNONNNNNNNNN㴧zqh ahX!0JjhX!UjhX!U hX!hX!hX!hX!hKMH* hX!hKMjhX!hKM0JU h-MhT h5MhT h5Mh[h[jh[0JU hj,'hT hT6hTjhT0JUhjh0JU,NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOO PPP#P$P6P7PXPYPZPhPiPvPwPPPPPPPPPļtgjfh>rFCJUjh>rFCJUh>rFh>rF0JCJmH sH jh>rFCJUjh>rFCJUh>rFh>rFCJmH sH hthj&hUjhUmHnHuhrP0JmHnHu hT0JjhT0JUhTh\hX!hKMCJaJ&PPPPPPPPPP QQQQQQQ h'}ih>rFjhUjH hUVhjhUh\hth>rFhmH sH h>rFh>rFCJmH sH h>rFh>rF0JCJmH sH jh>rFCJUj1h>rFCJUPPPPQQQQ$a$gd#}gd9 0&P1h:p// =!"#$% `!őhox&k]*p>(y|xڵ@MG>Aء}Bn#*01&I iҀ=ldDSA5 ́ apKؙP8R`4W4 F1#Tb.`FiTq22aP>ah%Lמ3Pb&rtm}ÌgdEDr,/ `IUVt>Ql_&$\QFkɇN{>ߍxjz`0td" sbb.eV0,FK% fOLFTdҤLOhF?Ցȕ"dS)C1^s" ƀaI: K30Ʀ+5xC,FS2^9&5c00 0qiFHAC3瘡9a VCrIt(s L r4t^h1wap]!?,j>S:YOr Lji`1"5˚L1`ILM x2ql>z6a [ bPX:Ǵw.0g0A)bP6+0c~N>]$o:LL,g&zѝ(l%J -a??v/,V8sDaW1cfj[g{fbp DKZd6ߒFϷb3÷Y_rBƊ5oIKmCbf_Lצ-Օ_L1tˊ"a[VDѿ[?x<1n'_{W^:=?_)_\?y_~0yGF^clvkk\%V*z<49 >: ^>ۯз7Or)&-7 :Gis(0lˌl8v,Кڿa]v"P3w6`l"F;ݍ FX 䲮YM} &([ LE uM9\vQmYIy19˙zh+8Mϊ)۶I-fņcvŠ IB gs2.X` sDad=a&ij<\Vabr0ݝ_01iψ%gˇaʺ9!N %BQA%"9äH#'pG%m{8`ͦªy| j39f2m sb݂5V8=[g`%, 5={ø ,T%o㪘婓vU^ܭ 1XA%.=II4ٿm2,a1abAl1 XZaJE2?E^!`̪PN-YF/W,M8VS0PXLґl 2h$j=*mvKz>q^.`i;As7$ $H&Ct!$vb&B#pBuóM.=fA흛\,gBY l[\lC[ m3:ಪ |J˪0/o3Vȗ@m3Vt4ܧ-O٘b[B&R^6 wyգL^U ȉԜt]b8FI#A'giCW+yhh?^ϊ[>?3c0G#6 s䘾w2Mm&؃b%`4MjGS2|ׅ&)V&S٭Gk& 0'Oa]9[AOǣ U2_ Laop<6 rϪafuߖ~tݘߘZΪ8;5~GMF#~fa dQx>Y 5$14Cm<M5 l^ș?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^`abcdefghukonpwqrstvxy|}~Root Entry  FK+NnmData _WordDocument ObjectPool NnK+Nn_1224061120FNnNnOle PRINT2CompObj e  !"#$%&'()*+,-./013456789;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOQ,    F   '' ' E ' E ' %l ' + bb' : bb' + bb' E ' ' ' FMicrosoft Graph ChartGBiff5MSGraph.Chart.89q &B""$"#,##0;\-"$"#,##0"$"#,##0;[Red]\-"$"#,##0"$"#,##0.00;\-"$"#,##0.00#"$"#,##0.00;[Red]\-"$"#,##0.005*0_-"$"* #,##0_-;\-ObjInfo Workbook 1Table{~\SummaryInformation( 2"$"* #,##0_-;_-"$"* "-"_-;_-@_-,)'_-* #,##0_-;\-* #,##0_-;_-* "-"_-;_-@_-=,8_-"$"* #,##0.00_-;\-"$"* #,##0.00_-;_-"$"* "-"??_-;_-@_-4+/_-* #,##0.00_-;\-* #,##0.00_-;_-* "-"??_-;_-@_-"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)72_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).)_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)61_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)1Arial1Arial1Arial1nArial1nArial1Arial= ,##0.00_ &` J ` J 883ffff̙̙3f3fff3f3f33333f33333\R3&STU 1er trim. 2e trim. 3e trim. 4e trim. Estffffff4@ffffff;@V@ffffff4@Ouest>@LC@LA@?@ Nord33333F@33333sG@F@33333E@WYd g= i >X4Dd3dD$% _M3O&Q4$% _M3O&Q4FA_C 3O_C 3 b43*43" 444 Oh+'0 ( <H d p | 8The Court Challenges Program of Canadas presentation Windows XPNormal Lvesque2Pb  c $A? ?3"`?2őhox&k]4`!őhox&k]*p>(y|xڵ@MG>Aء}B*B*phB@B -MNote de bas de pageJ&@!J -MAppel note de bas de p.H*6@26 :En-tte  !@ @B@ : Pied de page  !4)@Q4 :Numro de pageViu11~3AI d@PXh| I #I FGXY12EFZ[XY  ! "   I J 23HkGHklG H w!x!T"U"#$$ $$$8%9%&&f(g(h(~((T)U)}+~+,,W-X-..:/;///j0k0333334455-7.7_7`799~;;==4>6>7>F>G>AABBCCCCCCCCCDDD'D3DaDbDDEE1EeEEEEEFFFFFFFiGGHHHHIII0 0000x0x0000x000000x00x0x0x00000000000x0x0x0x00x00@0@0@0@0@000x0@000x@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0000 @0@0@000@0@00@0@0@0@0@00@00@0@0@0 0 0 0@0000 0@0@0@0@0@00@0@0@0@0@00@00@0000 @0 0@0 0 @0 0 @0 0 0 @0@0x0 @0x@0@00@00 0 0x@0@0@0(0(0@0(0(0( 0(0 0@0(@0(@0( 0@0( 0@00x0x00@0x@00@00@00000@08@0@00@00@008@08@08@0080800x@00@0@00@000x0@0x0x0@00@0000000@0x@0@0@0@0x@0@0x@0@0@0H@00D# @0@0@0@00Da@0@0@0@0@00T0)]@^0?_My00d12EF ! "  I J 23HkGklG H w!x!T"U"#&f(h(~((T)}+~+,,X-..:/;///j0333344-7_7`799~;;==4>F>G>CD'D3DaDbDEEEFFFFiGGHI@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@ 0@ 0@ 0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@ 0@0@0@0@0@ 0@0@ 0@0@ 0@0@ 0@ 0A 0<:@0@0@0@0@ 0@0@0@0A 0lA 0l@0@0@0A 0l@0A 0l@ 0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0_0܍@0_0@0_0@0 0 @00@00@0@00 0\ 0@0@00h t@00@000 {0 0T'2 = g 2R1!&P*/25;<.?WB3FFJLNPQ).234679:<=>?@BCFGIJKMNPRSTUVXZ[\1 [ %f07<IaLPQ*,-/0158;ADEHLOQWY]Q+=>>IX /DWz!XXXX&]X#:  /X$32$őhox&k];3@ (  \  S A ?"0(  B S  ?8P/5EKKqmK_KSKKTKLiKKK*nK|K)KdKdKKK4mK45K۱KKKKt<KkKKdzK,K0K\cKwdKcK%iKcKt/K$$iK"K!iK#iK-iK4KVK,cKt"iKK<K'iKhKiK7dL̅LdɬLlLd0L~LL"LlLtcL Ljm L LR L< LD L/LLtLL LD_G=  $$$((++,,,000000(0(0-0-0:0:0K0K0U033E668:9:9:;BB!BCCZDZDDDDDDDDDDI      !"#$%&'(*)+,-./0123465789:;=<>?@ABCDWO &&$$$((,,,',',0000&0&0+0+08080F0F0S0b0b033I668A9A9:;B)B)BCC`D`DDDDDDDDDDI  !"#$%&'(*)+,-./0123465789:;=<>?@ABCD=**urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=)*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType8E*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsdate8C*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity9A*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState9D*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplaceB?*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region>;*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PersonName  101120052006242528369DayMonthYearE   DCDAD?E   D?;E   D?D?D?;DCAD?D?D*)DADADADADADADCAD?;;;DA;;D)*D?D?D)*DCE   D?E   )),,A/H/0969@@bDFHHIko//bDDE EE3EdEEEF%FFHHI33333333Hm$ $h((,,6.74>5>7>G>bDEEEEFFFFFHHIbDFHHI0X V?(7/6./<D6\#wPCqQX%ʈdAckAh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hH^`o()h^`OJQJo(hH pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.h^`OJPJQJ^Jo(hH h^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hH/<\#wP0X qQckd7/60                                    ,S        gf/ /oE]J "G.T=h*"j,'k*3!,1).rFjG=HgK-MrPWQ[D _(`~`]aRd"|d\Ci'}ijLj%,ln%YoG;p`ksy"zf~{#}t({=D/[a}5R]mC?KMNnGWZb#)oRuV @!V\/2(=!5h#wYdz[X!c%Gr#ia$O1NFFFFI@I@UnknownLvesqueLvesque20061122T061214762fLvesqueCNGrard LvesqueGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z ArialMFLucida Handwriting?5 z Courier New;Wingdings"qhff 9"{ 9"{!24d@D@D 3qH)?c`;5The Court Challenges Program of Canada s presentation Windows XPLvesque(         FDocument Microsoft Word MSWordDocWord.Document.89q