Bill C-11 Military Justice

An Act to Amend the National Defense Act and Other Acts

Short Title: Military Justice System Modernization Act

Bill Type:  House Government

Bill Sponsor:  Minister of National Defense David J. McGuinty

Status: This Bill received Royal Assent on Thursday, June 18, 2026

Estimated Read Time: 5 minutes

What is this Bill For?

Bill C-11 reforms Canada's military justice system in response to independent reviews that found widespread sexual misconduct and systemic failures inside the Canadian Armed Forces. It: 

• moves covered Criminal Code cases committed in Canada out of the military justice system and into civilian investigation and civilian Courts
• changes the Appointment and terms of key military justice officials to improve their independence
• requires an independent review of the civilian-jurisdiction change within three years
• requires Government to develop a plan for an Inspector General for misconduct in the Canadian Forces

WHO GAINS POWER

Independent military justice officials — the Provost Marshal General, Director of Military Prosecutions and Director of Defense Counsel Services — gain 7-year non-renewable terms and can only be removed for cause with a House of Commons resolution. The Judge Advocate General must now formally respect their independence, ending previous interference in charging and trial decisions.

Civilian police and Courts gain exclusive authority to investigate and prosecute the covered Criminal Code offences alleged to have been committed in Canada. Military authorities may take limited immediate steps to protect people or preserve evidence until civilian authorities take over.

Victims and people acting on their behalf gain expanded access to Victim’s Liaison Officers in military cases that remain within the military justice system.

Government must develop and table a plan for creating an Inspector General for misconduct in the Canadian Forces after consulting affected people and experts. Bill C‑11 does not itself create the Inspector General’s Office.

WHO LOSES POWER

The military chain of command loses jurisdiction over sexual offense cases committed in Canada and loses the ability to control prosecution decisions for sexual misconduct. Military can still secure evidence and make arrests before civilian authorities arrive.

ccused military members charged with the covered Criminal Code offences committed in Canada face investigation and trial in the civilian justice system rather than Court martial.

Military judges no longer take part in summary hearings. Bill C‑11 also expands who may qualify for Appointment as a military judge.

WHO LOSES — CAREER BETRAYAL

Service members who volunteered to serve were forced to abandon careers due to sexual misconduct the military failed to address. Some were driven out during training, some after field assignment — all believing the system would protect them. The military recruited service members into careers while failing to protect them, eliminating wages, benefits, pensions and advancement. The retention crisis of members leaving early is measurable proof of systemic failure. No one was held accountable for forcing them out.

WHO GAINS MONEY

The military budget funds implementation, expanded Victim’s Liaison Officer access, training and development of the Inspector General plan. Civilian police, prosecutors and Courts take on the covered cases committed in Canada.

WHO LOSES MONEY

Costs shift to civilian court systems for prosecuting military sexual offences. Potential compensation liability for service members forced to abandon careers due to unprosecuted misconduct could be massive if systemic scale is formally acknowledged. 

THE CATCH

Military justice has been used to remove dissenting officers by prosecuting decades-old allegations — including cases where officers questioned COVID vaccine mandates and were court-martialed for 30-year-old conduct only after challenging current policy. This raises the question of whether military justice can be weaponized as a political tool.

Not all command officers are corrupt — some fear career loss if they don't comply with institutional pressure, some follow questionable orders and some whistleblow and face retaliation. Some officers transition to Government positions to secure military funding, creating a revolving door between military command and political power.

Recruits lack informed consent about sexual misconduct rates before enlisting — the Bill does not address this gap.

⚠️Civilian Jurisdiction Will Be Reviewed — Covered Criminal Code offences committed in Canada move to civilian police and civilian Courts. An independent review must begin within three years after these changes come into force. The completed report must be tabled in both Houses of Parliament.

⚠️ Military Justice Can Be Weaponized — Cases exist where officers who challenged institutional policy were prosecuted for decades-old conduct only after speaking out. The Bill does not include safeguards against politically-motivated prosecutions.

⚠️ No Informed Consent for Recruits — The Bill does not require the military to disclose sexual misconduct rates to recruits before they enlist. New members cannot make an informed decision about the risks they are entering.

⚠️ Revolving Door Between Military Command and Political Power — No mechanism in the Bill addresses officers who transition to Government positions to influence military funding and policy after leaving command roles.