Honourable Jasvinder S. Basran's Questionnaire

Under the new judicial application process introduced by the Minister of Justice on October 20, 2016, any interested and qualified Canadian lawyer or judge may apply for federal judicial appointment by completing a questionnaire. The questionnaires are then used by the Judicial Advisory Committees across Canada to review candidates and submit a list of "highly recommended" and "recommended" candidates for consideration by the Minister of Justice. Candidates are advised that parts of their questionnaire may be made available to the public, with their consent, should they be appointed to the bench. The information is published as it was submitted by the candidates at the time they applied, subject to editing where necessary for privacy reasons.

Below are Parts 5, 6, 7, and 11 of the questionnaire completed by the Honourable Jasvinder S. (Bill) Basran.

Questionnaire for Judicial Appointment

[...]

Part 5 – Language

Please note that in addition to the answers to the questions set out below, you may be assessed as to your level of language proficiency.

Without further training, are you able to read and understand court materials in:

• English: Yes
• French: No

Without further training, are you able to discuss legal matters with your colleagues in:

• English: Yes
• French: No

Without further training, are you able to converse with counsel in court in:

• English: Yes
• French: No

Without further training, are you able to understand oral submission in court in:

• English: Yes
• French: No

Part 6 – Education

Name of Institutions, Years Attended, Degree/Diploma and Year Obtained:

• University of Saskatchewan, College of Law, 1991-1994, LL.B (1994)
• University of Saskatchewan, College of Commerce, 1984-1989, B. Comm (1989) - double major in Finance and Marketing

Continuing Education:

Completed a broad range of Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia (CLESBC) and internal Department of Justice (DOJ) courses on tax, administrative, constitutional, and aboriginal law, ethics, as well as civil litigation procedure and skills.

Honours and Awards:

• Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal - Awarded for the creation of the Department of Justice Pro Bono Program
• Senator J. Hnatyshyn Academic Achievement Award, University of Saskatchewan, College of Law
• University of Saskatchewan Law Review 1992-1993 - selection based on academic achievement

Part 7 – Professional and Employment History

Please include a chronology of work experience, starting with the most recent and showing employers' names and dates of employment. For legal work, indicate areas of work or specialization with years and, if applicable, indicate if they have changed.

Legal Work Experience:

• 2007-Present

  Regional Director General and Senior General Counsel, British Columbia Regional Office, Department of Justice - Aboriginal, Tax, Administrative, Constitutional, Crown, Extradition/International Assistance, Immigration, and a broad range of public law civil litigation

• 2004-2007

  Director and General Counsel, Tax Law Section, British Columbia Regional Office, Department of Justice - Tax Law

• 2002-2004

  Team Leader and Senior Counsel, Tax Law Section, British Columbia Regional Office, Department of Justice - Tax Law

• 1995-2002

  Counsel, Tax Law Section, British Columbia Regional Office, Department of Justice - Tax Law

• 1994- 1995 Articled Student, Campney and Murphy, Vancouver, BC
• 1993 Summer Student, Campney and Murphy, Vancouver, BC

Non-Legal Work Experience:

• 1989-1991 Assistant Manager, Royal Bank of Canada, Toronto, ON

Other Professional Experience:

List all bar associations, legal or judicial-related committees of which you are or have been a member, and give the titles and dates of any offices which you have held in such groups.

• 2014-Present - Director, Access Pro Bono Society of British Columbia
• 2016-Present - Regional Director General, National Litigation Sector Board of Directors, Department of Justice
• 2007-2016 - Regional Director General, Executive Committee, Department of Justice
• 2008-Present - National Pro Bono Champion, Department of Justice
• 2009-Present - National Champion for Visible Minorities, Department of Justice
• 2009-Present - Member of the Employment Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Steering Committee, Department of Justice
• 2008-2012 - Co-chaired, launched, and implemented the DOJ National Mentoring Program

Pro Bono Activities:

I created and launched the first national Department of Justice Pro Bono Program. This included the drafting and development of a pilot Pro Bono Policy and implementation of three DOJ pro bono pilot projects, in three different jurisdictions (British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario) involving three different areas of law. The success of these pilot programs led to the Department's adoption of a permanent national DOJ Pro Bono Policy, which I helped draft. I successfully led efforts to remove longstanding barriers in order to enable DOJ lawyers to perform pro bono work. There are currently eight DOJ pro bono clinics in six different cities that I helped establish. I was awarded the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal for this work. I have volunteered periodically at the DOJ Wills Clinic since it opened in March 2012. In 2014, I joined the Board of Directors of Access Pro Bono Society of British Columbia and I am a member of two of its sub-committees. I have been a panelist and made presentations to the biennial National Pro Bono Conference in 2012, 2014, and 2016 on public sector Pro Bono.

Teaching and Continuing Education:

List all legal or judicial educational organizations and activities you have been involved with (e.g. teaching course at a law faculty, bar association, National Judicial Institute, or the Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice).

• Speaker and Panelist - Biennial National Pro Bono Conference - 2012, 2014, and 2016
• Current Cases Panelist - Canadian Tax Foundation Conference - September 25-27, 2005
• Course Co-Chair - Charter Conference - Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia - May 30-31, 2002

Community and Civic Activities:

List all organizations of which you are a member and any offices held with dates.

[...]

• 2014-Present - Director, Access Pro Bono British Columbia
• 2012-Present - Access Pro Bono Volunteer lawyer, Wills Clinic, Vancouver BC
• 2005-2015 - Little League Baseball Coach, Cypress Park Little League, West Vancouver, BC
• 2006-2014 - Director and Ombudsman, Cypress Park Little League
• 2006-2009 - Basketball Coach, Steve Nash Youth Basketball League, West Vancouver, BC
• 2006-2008 - Soccer Coach, West Vancouver Soccer Club, West Vancouver, BC
• 2002-2004 - Little League Baseball Coach, Little Mountain Baseball, Vancouver, BC

Part 11 – The Role of the Judiciary in Canada's Legal System

The Government of Canada seeks to appoint judges with a deep understanding of the judicial role in Canada. In order to provide a more complete basis for evaluation, candidates are asked to offer their insight into broader issues concerning the judiciary and Canada's legal system. For each of the following questions, please provide answers of between 750 and 1000 words.

1. What would you regard as your most significant contribution to the law and the pursuit of justice in Canada?

I will answer this question in two parts because I believe my most significant contribution to the law is different from my most significant contribution to the pursuit of justice. The former relates to my legal work as a senior DOJ official, the latter is outside of my day to day responsibilities at the DOJ.

My most significant contribution to the law is my input into the development of legal positions taken by the Government of Canada on a range of significant public law issues litigated in BC. As the head of the Department of Justice in BC, I have both the responsibility and privilege of leading discussions, providing advice, and making decisions on the legal positions taken on significant Justice files in BC. This province generates a significant number of nationally important, precedent setting cases, particularly in the areas of Aboriginal Law and Charter challenges to federal legislation.

I strive to ensure that we take a principled, ethical, and pragmatic approach on our files by grounding our legal advice, and positions, on the importance of the rule of law and the public good. My role requires me to give fearless yet pragmatic advice, explain the relevant legal options and risks, and then take instructions from democratically elected leaders. At times over the past decade, this has been challenging when the positions we were asked to take were not consistent with the advice we had provided. My role in those instances was to ensure that our litigators understood the imperative of taking positions based on whole of government interests, as articulated by our elected leaders, while conveying to ministers, and other senior officials, the risks inherent in not following our best advice. I have been at the crossroads of these dialogues on many significant files.

I have created an atmosphere in which ideas and positions are debated openly and vigorously in order to enable us to make the best possible decisions with respect to the legal issues we face. One of the central failings of poor decision making is the tendency to avoid difficult conversations out of either a misplaced sense of decorum or career self-interest. Doing so inhibits the discussion on the best available information and ideas that are required to make the most important decisions. I identified this issue early in my career as the head of the DOJ in BC and took steps to address it. Throughout my tenure, I have created and supported structures and mechanisms that encourage the vibrant, thorough yet respectful exchange of differing views on important issues. I am proud to lead one of the most productive, well respected, and effective offices of the Department of Justice. Creating this environment has helped me provide the best possible advice on the wide range of public law issues litigated in BC.

My most significant contribution to the pursuit of justice in Canada has been unleashing the power of Department of Justice lawyers to do pro bono work. Lack of access to justice for large segments of the population is one of the most pervasive and significant challenges to the pursuit of justice in Canada. Justice cannot be pursued if it cannot be accessed. Pro bono programs are one of the critical pathways by which those living with limited means can access the legal system.

Throughout the history of the Department of Justice, there was an implicit and later explicit policy that prohibited DOJ lawyers from providing pro bono services in addition to their work as Justice lawyers. I was instrumental in changing that. In 2012, I led the creation and launch of the first national Department of Justice Pro Bono Program which involved three pilot programs in three different jurisdictions, each delivering a different type of legal service (wills drafting, landlord tenant disputes, and small claims legal advice). Justice lawyers volunteered to provide pro bono services at these clinics and the success of this pilot program led to the Department's adoption of a permanent DOJ Pro Bono Policy that permits Justice lawyers across the country to deliver pro bono services. There are currently eight DOJ pro bono clinics in six different cities that to date have helped over one thousand Canadians access justice.

I volunteer periodically at the DOJ Wills Clinic in Vancouver and speak about pro bono, both within the Department of Justice and externally, to promote the value and importance of pro bono work. I strongly believe that it is both a professional obligation, and a privilege, to be able to provide legal services to members of our community who can't otherwise afford to pursue justice.

2. How has your experience provided you with insight into the variety and diversity of Canadians and their unique perspectives?

I have seen and experienced the variety and diversity of this country, and its citizens, from several different perspectives: First, as a child, born and raised in Saskatoon; Next, as a teenager living abroad for a year and then returning to Saskatoon for high school and university; Throughout my early 20s, living and working in Toronto and then finally as a married lawyer starting his career, and family, in Vancouver. I have also gained insight into Canadians and their perspectives as a traveler, who has visited all but one province and one territory in Canada and, from afar, while visiting approximately 30 other countries, including, importantly, India, the country of my ancestry. As I will outline below, these experiences have provided me with insight into the variety and diversity of Canadians and their unique perspectives.

As a youngster, I often didn't feel as Canadian as I wanted to. Growing up in Saskatoon during the 1970s was both idyllic and disconcerting. Idyllic because it was a carefree childhood with plenty of other kids in our neighbourhood, impromptu games of shinny, organized hockey, and endless debates about our favourite teams and players. Disconcerting because my family and I were periodically, and sometimes aggressively, reminded that we were newcomers and foreigners. Racial taunts, invocations to "go home", and the feeling of not belonging puzzled me. I was born in Saskatoon. It was the only home I had ever known.

On an extended visit to India when I was six years old, it became obvious to me that I was not Indian. I didn't speak the language (although I later learned enough to make myself understood), appreciate the nuances of the customs or traditions, or have a home there. We had plenty of loving relatives who embraced and welcomed us but it was understood that we were visitors, the relatives from Canada. Accordingly, as a child, I was not completely accepted, or comfortable, in the country of my birth and I was a foreigner in the country of my ancestry. I seemingly had a foot in both worlds with a commensurately unstable sense of belonging to neither.

I had a memorable opportunity to live and study abroad when I was in eighth grade. My father took a sabbatical and we lived in Stockholm, Sweden. During that year, my family and I traveled extensively throughout Europe including to the U.S.S.R and the U.K. In each of these countries, when asked where I was from, I said Canada. More often than not, the next question asked was where was I really from. I found this annoying. Why couldn't these people accept that I was Canadian? Why did I need to explain myself? I knew that I was being asked these questions because I am not white.

I resented this extra questioning but a chance encounter with a Swedish girl of Indian ancestry shifted my thinking. We met at a Diwali event in Stockholm. She spoke Punjabi and Swedish fluently but her English wasn't strong and my knowledge of Swedish was very basic. After fumbling through some broken English and Swedish, we realized that we had another language in common, Punjabi. The girl's parents were immigrants to Sweden and she had been born there. Her upbringing and experience was similar to mine. She was a Swede of Indian ancestry but if I had met her in Canada, I probably would have asked her where she was really from. My conception of Swedes was that they were all blonde haired and blue eyed. I realized that I had been far too binary in my thinking. I didn't have to be Canadian or Indian any more than this girl had to be either Swedish or Indian. I could be a Canadian, of Indian ancestry, who spoke English, Punjabi, some French and even some Swedish. I was a Western Canadian who bled green for the Riders, loved the Jays, and adored the Habs. I wasn't any one thing, I was a composite of all of these things, and more.

Canada, the country of my birth made this possible because it is largely a nation of immigrants. With the clear exception of our Indigenous Peoples, Canadians are simply immigrants with seniority. This discovery made me more secure and confident in my identity when I returned to Canada to attend high school and later university. It also strengthened my pride and identity in being Canadian. There were still challenges and taunts from time to time but I responded to them with a clear sense of belonging and an understanding that sometimes, questions are based on ignorance not malevolence. Either way, I knew who I was and that I belonged in Canada and am proud to be Canadian.

After completing my first degree at the University of Saskatchewan, I accepted a position with a major Canadian bank in Toronto. I craved the opportunity to live in a large and diverse city and I embraced all that it had to offer. After completing law school, I knew that I wanted to settle in a large urban center. My wife wanted to remain in the West, close to her family, so we decided to start our lives together, and careers, in Vancouver. With more than a century's history of immigration, vibrant and diverse communities, Vancouver was the right fit for my wife and I and the perfect place to start our family.

My career with the federal government has afforded me the opportunity to work and travel throughout BC and across Canada. I believe strongly in appreciating and understanding our country so, before we started traveling internationally with our children, we showed them every region of Canada. I have the privilege of having friends, colleagues, and family members from across this country. Spending time with them, knowing their realities and aspirations, combined with my own experiences from across Canada gives me an understanding and appreciation for the strength, diversity, and unique perspectives of Canadians from every part of our amazing country.

3. Describe the appropriate role of a judge in a constitutional democracy.

The appropriate role of a judge in a constitutional democracy is multi-faceted and essential. A properly functioning democracy requires a free and independent judiciary that is able to make its decisions based on the facts that are established by evidence and applying them to the relevant law. Judges must strive to be as neutral and impartial as possible. Doing so requires an appreciation and acknowledgment that all judges bring their own individual life experiences and perspectives to their roles. They must recognize their own biases and tendencies and counter them, to the greatest extent possible, by keeping an open mind, humbly accepting the limitations of their own knowledge and experience, and remaining steadfastly curious and open to learning new things. Judges also must be brave and resolute in discharging their responsibilities to the best of their abilities notwithstanding whatever public reaction there may be to their decisions. Judges should never become isolated and withdrawn from public discourse but their decisions must be principled and unaffected by the vagaries of public opinions and sentiments.

Our constitutional democracy is about more than the simple rule of the majority. It is at least equally, if not more so, about rights, and the protection of them. The Canadian Constitution explicitly sets out these rights and it is an essential duty and obligation of the judiciary to protect these rights in order for our democracy to function effectively. This is especially the case when there is a conflict between legislation, that is supported by the majority, and the rights protected by the constitution. It is in these moments that it is the duty of an independent and courageous judiciary to protect constitutional rights notwithstanding the will of the majority. The judiciary functioning in this manner strengthens democracy and ensures adherence to core values and rights that are enshrined in our constitution.

On a range of issues of public importance, the courts engage in a dialogue with Parliament to ensure the constitutionality of legislation. Neither has the final word and each must respect the importance and necessity of the other. This iterative dialogue is informed by the imperative on the judiciary to interpret impugned legislation's constitutionality with regard to the well-established, and fundamentally Canadian, Living Tree Doctrine. This ensures that constitutional principles, and the application of them, evolve with changing societal norms and standards. This is one of the strengths and hallmarks of our constitutional democracy and it ensures that our laws keep pace with positive and progressive societal changes while remaining rooted in our essential constitutional rights and values.

Judges play an essential role in a well-functioning democracy because they are a check on the unbridled exercise of power by Parliament. In our form of parliamentary democracy, with its concentration of power in the office of the Prime Minister, infrequent free votes, and the Westminster tradition of government MPs steadfastly supporting proposed government legislation, the judiciary plays a vital role in ensuring that legislation is consistent with our Constitution. The judiciary applies constitutional principles, including Charter values, to prevent the tyranny of the majority. However, the judiciary must be careful not to overstep its role. The dialogue between the judiciary and Parliament is not one where either can lay claim to having the last word. Each must be respectful of the other's role and authority and operate within their own confines in order for our system of laws and government to function effectively.

The judiciary must not tread into the domain of Parliament by granting to itself, or even conceiving of itself as a body that has the power to create new laws and policy that go beyond its appropriate role. I don't believe we have a problem in Canada with "activist courts" and I think an objective review of the Supreme Court of Canada's decisions supports this view. There are undeniably some trial and appellate decisions that provoke debate on this issue but for the most part, Canadian courts have a fairly consistent and appropriate understanding of their role.

Judges must discharge their responsibilities with the highest standards of professionalism, rigour, diligence, timeliness, courtesy and civility. They must think deeply and critically about the evidence that is presented to them and be decisive about the application of the facts to their understanding and interpretation of the law. This is their day job but it does not end there. It is equally important that judges conduct themselves with the highest standards of ethics and civility in both their personal and professional lives. It is the duty of all judges to uphold and maintain respect for the institution of the judiciary. It is a privilege to serve as a judge and an obligation to bring honour to that office, and to the institution, by passing it forward to the next generation of jurists with the same dignity, respect and honour that this role requires of all judges on their first day on the bench.

4. Who is the audience for decisions rendered by the court(s) to which you are applying?

There are several audiences for judicial decisions. The most obvious audience is the litigants involved in any particular case be they a prosecutor and an accused, private individuals, businesses, governments, or other organizations. The outcome of any particular case will usually have its most immediate impact on the parties to the litigation but they are certainly not the only audience for judicial decisions.