Nothing on line yet, but the CBC ran a story this morning about a trial going on in Prince George, B.C. being conducted in French because the accused is a francophone. There are only three qualified judges in B.C. that can speak French. Apparently all discourse will be spoken in French with translations for the anglophone witnesses.
Do accused anglophones in Quebec have the same right ?
The constitutional act of 1867 provides French and English speakers the right to a trial in the language of their choice. From
The Charter though in Sections 16-22 lays out the language rights available to Canadians. Wikipedia has this…
Note that provincial courts are not mentioned aside from New Brunswick however existing rights from the old BNA act would still apply within provincial courts.
I would guess that Sections 7 to 22 which describe fundamental legal rights would cover the bit about a person being tried and informed by the court in their own language.
Spoons or GingeroftheNorth might have a better picture though.
I have never had to go to court (and if I had, it would have been in French), so I can’t speak for personal experience. But I’ve checked the website of Quebec’s court system (which is completely available in English, click here) and I found this page. Oddly enough, it doesn’t say so in the English version, but the French version mentions that this judge was a member of the “comité sur l’accessibilité à la justice en langue anglaise.” So I assume that you have the right to a trial in English in Quebec, and there are efforts done to ensure that this right is respected.
Here.
That’s for the Superior court, but I assume that you may testify in both French or English in the other courts.
For a criminal trial in Quebec, the accused has the right to a government-paid interpreter in the language of his choice, but does not necessarily have the right to a trial entirely in English.
From Quebec’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms
And check out this legal education website
That extends across the country because of similar wording in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. For instance, the Air India trial was conducted in English, but the accused were frequently seen listening to an interpreter on headphones.
In practice, I’ve seen that trials will take place in French, with an interpreter interpreting witness testimony for the benefit of the accused, and all the legal mumbo-jumbo happening in French, with a judge rendering day-to-day decisions in French, then restating things in English.
However, when it comes to civil trials in Quebec, or trials with no threat of being tossed in jail, you’re not likely to get an interpreter. In those cases your options will likely depend on the trial’s location. If you are heading to court in Gatineau, you’d probably be best off getting a bilingual lawyer, or bringing along your own interpreter, because the court probably won’t pay to provide service in English.
I must respectfully disagree with some of the comments posted above. In Canada, the accused has a right to a criminal trial in whichever of the official languages the accused speaks, either English or French. This right applies in all provinces and territories, since it is governed by federal law. The judge, Crown prosecutor and other court officials must use the language chosen by the accused. Witnesses can testify in whatever language they choose, but if the accused does not understand the testimony, the interpreter will be provided at public expense.
The procedure in criminal trials in Canada are governed by the federal Criminal Code, not by provincial laws such as the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure.
Part XVII of the Criminal Code sets out the language rights of the accused. Since the Code is a federal statute, these rights apply in all provinces and territories, including Quebec, regardless of provincial laws regulating languages in the courts. As well, the rights set out by Part XVII go beyond the right to use the language of one’s choice, which is the right set out by s. 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867 and ss. 16 to 22 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Those rights simply guarantee the right to use the language of one’s choice in the federal courts, the Quebec courts and the New Brunswick courts. They do not give a party to proceedings the right to require that the entire trial be conducted in the language of one’s choice. Part XVII of the Code gives that right to the accused.
For more information on Part XVII and the language rights of the accused, see the Supreme Court decision inR. v. Beaulac, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 768.
(I’ve argued this type of issue in court, so I have some familiarity with it.)
Grey, I’ll defer to Northern Piper on this one. Appreciate that you thought I might be able to help though–I’m taking it as a compliment. 
“There’s no such thing as bad publicity!”
For comparison, in New York, all court proceedings are in English, but all litigants and witnesses (criminal and civil) are entitled to an interpreter if they cannot speak English well. In New York City, there are usually Spanish interpreters available almost all the time, and Chinese (I forget whether Mandarin or Cantonese) on a rotating basis among the courts. Other interpreters for a shockingly large array of languages can be called in when needed.
In practice, you just have to notify the Judge a few days in advance and there will be an interpreter made available. The interpreter will translate all of the proceedings, including the testimony and the “legal mumbo jumbo.”
Are defendants tried together in Canada? If so what happens when one wants to be tried in French and the other wants to be tried in English?
The court can always order that two accused by tried separately. I don’t know of any cases where the situation you mention has arisen, but I would imagine there would be separate trials.
It just so happens that I work as a freelance interpreter, and I am accredited to work in the Quebec Court system. Most of what is said in the other posts is pretty much correct.
Educaloi is a non-profiy organization whose mission is to inform Quebecers of their rights and obligations by providing legal information in everyday language. You can consult their website here (click on the “English” tab at the top of the page to read their stuff in English).
The best summary I can find of language rights in the courts is the following, from their site:
"The Charter of the French Language (better known as “Bill 101”) confirms the constitutional right of using either French or English in any pleading or process before the courts. It actually goes further than the Constitution, by guaranteeing the free translation of any judgment from English to French, or vice versa, at the request of one of the parties. In some cases, the judge may have his decision translated even before it is officially released.
Also, as mentioned above, an accused may choose English as the language of trial. People who have been granted an acquittal or pardon in the case of criminal charges may ask that their file be translated to have proof of their good conduct for American Customs.
The Ministère de la justice du Québec will provide an interpreter to an accused who wants to testify in his own language or does not understand the language used by a witness. However, such free services are limited to criminal cases. In civil matters, as in all other provinces, you have to pay for your own interpreter. "
Most Quebec judges, lawyers and prosecutors can speak English (some with a heavy accent). What can and does happen, though, is that one of the witnesses at a trial held in English may speak only French. In this case, my job is to sit next to the accused and whisper to them in English what the witness is saying.
A funny thing that sometimes happens is that the accused is very upset at what he considers untrue testimony by a witness, and he grabs my arm and says: “THat’s not true, object!” as if I were his lawyer, instead of his interpreter.
Another rule is that I am bound to tell the court everything the accused says to me. I cannot edit. So I have to warn them that before the trial that if they whisper to me “the Judge looks like a mean bastard”, I have to get up and repeat that comment in the other language!
Sorry, I forgot to supply the link to educaloi. Here
:smack:
I do appreciate your vote of confidence. My answer, however, would echo yours.
{{{blush}}}
Canadian law distinquishes between linguistic rights and legal rights essential to a fair trial. The right to an interpreter is the latter type of right. It’s guaranteed by s. 14 of the Charter because it is essential for a fair trial that the parties understand everything that is said in court. You only have a the right to an interpreter if you do not understand what is being said in court.
The linguistic rights are different. They are the outgrowth of our history as a nation with two main language groups, and the variety of ways that those two groups have accomodated each other. The federal Parliament has determined that everyone in Canada has a right to a trial in the official language of their choice, regardless of their proficiency in the other language. An accused who is completely bilingual can still insist on having the trial in the language of his/her choice, even though he/she could understand everything perfectly if the trial were conducted in the other official language.