Rules of Debate / Sub judice

Sub judice; royal commission

Journals pp. 491-3

Debates p. 4583-4

Background

During debate on a motion by Mr. Sharp (Minister of Finance) that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply, Mr. McIlraith (Minister of Public Works) rose on a point of order to protest certain remarks by Mr. Fairweather (Royal), which he alleged dealt with evidence before a royal commission of inquiry. Mr. McIlraith argued that the matter was sub judice, and could not be discussed by the House. After listening to Members' comments, the Speaker ruled.

Issue

During debate, can Members make comments that bear on evidence given before a royal commission which has not yet completed its work?

Decision

Yes. Comments of this kind are permissible.

Reasons given by the Speaker

A royal commission is an administrative body that prepares recommendations upon which the Government is free to act or not. Parliament's right to enact legislation cannot be set aside merely because certain matters have been referred to a royal commission for study and recommendation. Furthermore, because the commission is not empowered to render a decision (in other words, the Government may or may not implement the report once it is made), the matter is not sub judice.

Sources cited

Debates, October 17, 1957, p. 119.

Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 127, c. 149(c).

Bourinot, 4th ed., p. 301.

May, 16th ed., pp. 400, 457.

References

Debates, May 2, 1966, pp. 4576-83.