“Person with a vagina”: Paul St-Pierre Plamondon responds to Judge Wagner

Paul St-Pierre Plamondon accuses the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Richard Wagner, of himself spreading “misinformation” by asserting that the deputies had not read the judgment using the expression “person having a vagina” before condemning it in a motion from the National Assembly last winter.

I had read itassured the PQ leader Tuesday morning, a few hours before the resumption of parliamentary work in Quebec.

109, there is indeed the use of the expression “person having a vagina” instead of talking about a woman, [ce qui] opens the door to an entire ideological corpus [et qui] is not explained in the judgment”,”text”:”We read it, we discussed it, we did our homework and in paragraph 109, there is indeed the use of the expression “person having a vagina” instead of talking about a woman, [ce qui] opens the door to an entire ideological corpus [et qui] is not explained in the judgment”}}”>We read it, we discussed, we did our homework and in paragraph 109, there is indeed the use of the expression “person with a vagina” instead of talking about a woman, [ce qui] opens the door to an entire ideological corpus [et qui] not explained in the judgmenthe declared at a press briefing.

Mr. St-Pierre-Plamondon therefore maintains that the controversial decision rendered by the Supreme Court last March had to be denounced.

The PQ leader also says concerned of the exit of Judge Wagner who, on Monday, covertly accused the Minister responsible for the Status of Women, Martine Biron, of having spread “misinformation” by convincing the other elected representatives of the National Assembly to vote in favor of the motion.

The judiciary has a duty of reserve [et] It is not up to the judiciary to play politics.

Judge Wagner, when he tells elected officials what can or cannot be said and when he himself commits disinformation by suggesting that we did not read the judgment before to pronounce, he goes far beyond his duty of reservehe continued.

It undermines the population’s confidence in the impartiality that we are supposed to be able to verify from the courts and it confirms partiality, ideological uniformity, against Quebec’s positions by intervening in something where it is wrong.

The PQ leader was also surprised, Tuesday, by the remorse expressed by the other opposition parties in the National Assembly. I find it embarrassing to hear Québec solidaire and the Liberal Party having to say that they didn’t read anything and that they voted without knowing what he was talking about, he said. I don’t apologize.

A warning, says Minister Biron

Martine Biron, who has always defended her motion, also assured the parliamentary press on Tuesday that she had indeed read the decision as a whole before publicly condemning it. I don’t know where the idea comes from that I haven’t read the judgmentshe blurted out.

Unlike Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, the minister does not consider that Judge Wagner exceeded his role by inviting elected officials to exercise caution in their comments about the judgments of the Supreme Court. But generally, each power remains in its square [de sable]she admitted on Tuesday.

I think what the judge said was that there were deputies who had not read it, the judgment, and he warned us against speed and misinformation, to be careful about that . And I hear that.

The minister was finally pleased that her concerns about the expression at the heart of the controversy had reached the ears of Judge Wagner. I made my point on this, I realize that I was heard by the Supreme Court [et] I find it very goodshe stressed.

The controversy dates from three months ago, while a column from National Post (New window) had postulated that a judgment (New window) rendered a few days earlier by the Supreme Court, in a sexual assault case, [impliquait] that the complainant should be referred to as a “person with a vagina” rather than as a woman.

The affair then caused quite a stir in Canada, including in Quebec, where Minister Biron quickly tabled a motion aimed at denounce the choice of words used in judgment.

The motion, tabled jointly with the Liberal Party, the Parti Québécois and independent MP Marie-Claude Nichols, stipulated in particular that Parliament dissociates itself from the use of terms or concepts that contribute to making women invisible. All the deputies present then adopted it without debate.

However, media outlets, including Radio-Canada, published articles before and after the vote to put the use of the expression “person with a vagina” into context – reports that were also welcomed by Judge Wagner on Monday.

The experts consulted explained that it was an expression of a legal nature, used as part of a demonstration about penile-vaginal penetration – an act at the heart of the case in question. They also pointed out that the word women appeared dozens of times in the judgment.