Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

[MacNav63]

The NDA seems to grant the GiC a great deal of leeway in making someone subject to the CSD.

I am sure a Court Martial that involved a civilian would end up at the SCC over jurisdiction issues. It would be interesting to see that ruling…

It's a long time ago but I seem to recall my Dad being involved in Courts Martial involving dependent civilians in Lahr. Those wouldn't have involved the CSD but there must have been some delegation of civilian legal processes to the military justice system under those circumstances. FJAG would know better and like I said, long time ago (early 70s) and there has been a whole lot of change to both systems since then.

 

[dapaterson]

All members of the CAF outside Canada have been placed on active service, per GiC regulations. This means persons accompanying them, including family members, are subject to the CSD per NDA 60(1)(f). That framework has been in place since the 1990s, if not earlier.

 

[FJAG]

It's a long time ago but I seem to recall my Dad being involved in Courts Martial involving dependent civilians in Lahr. Those wouldn't have involved the CSD but there must have been some delegation of civilian legal processes to the military justice system under those circumstances. FJAG would know better and like I said, long time ago (early 70s) and there has been a whole lot of change to both systems since then.

There were quite a few of those back in the day. They would be governed under s 60(1)(f) accompanying forces. Note that under the NATO SOFA, states carve ut being subject to host nation laws in exchange for taking jurisdiction over their folks. Dependents are covered under provisions of the NATO SOFA. This is in part why s 132 exists. It incorporates as a service offence the contravention a foreign law in that foreign country.

All members of the CAF outside Canada have been placed on active service, per GiC regulations. This means persons accompanying them, including family members, are subject to the CSD per NDA 60(1)(f). That framework has been in place since the 1990s, if not earlier.

It was in place going back at least to the 70s AFAIK.

Note as well that all ResF members are on active service when out of the country under the NATO active service OiC.

 

[dapaterson]

Note as well that all ResF members are on active service when out of the country under the NATO active service OiC.

I generally include the Res F when discussing the CAF

An oft forgotten thing is that members of the Supp Res are CAF members, and therefore subject to the CSD under some circumstances. Or a class A Reservist who is also a DND public servant would be arguably subject to the CSD when at their PS job.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I generally include the Res F when discussing the CAF

An oft forgotten thing is that members of the Supp Res are CAF members, and therefore subject to the CSD under some circumstances. Or a class A Reservist who is also a DND public servant would be arguably subject to the CSD when at their PS job.

While technically true, I think the DMP would have to look carefully at the context of the alleged offence before contemplating supporting charges under the NDA for a reservist whose day job took them onto DND property, lest it open up an avenue for an appeal.

A military judge’s first question at the proceedings would likely be why this case was not in front of a civilian judge. The Prosecutor had better have a pretty good answer ready.

I can conceive of a few situations where a reservist maybe attempted to “cross the streams” between their civilian employment and their status as a reservist that would certainly indicate maybe a service offence had occurred.

 

[FJAG]

I generally include the Res F when discussing the CAF

Unfortunately the CAF doesn't.