## Facts

- Four Canadian Armed Forces members, all subject to the Code of Service Discipline, were prosecuted before standing courts martial.
- They were convicted of various offences under the Criminal Code and/or the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, treated as “service offences” through National Defence Act (NDA) s. 130(1)(a); one appeal also implicated NDA s. 117(f) (“any act of a fraudulent nature”).
- The challenged scheme permits courts martial to try most federal offences committed by service members, including conduct occurring off-duty in civilian settings.
- The accused argued that allowing military prosecution based on military status alone (without a service connection) violated Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms s. 7 as overbroad.

## Issues

1. Whether NDA ss. 130(1)(a) and 117(f) deprive liberty contrary to Charter s. 7 because they are overbroad.
2. How to characterize the provisions’ legislative purpose for the s. 7 overbreadth analysis.
3. Whether military jurisdiction over these offences requires a constitutionally mandated or interpretive “military nexus” (service connection).

## Decision

- Appeals dismissed; convictions and courts-martial jurisdiction upheld.
- The Court held that NDA ss. 130(1)(a) and 117(f) are not overbroad and therefore do not violate Charter s. 7.
- The Court rejected an implied or constitutional “military nexus” requirement and declined to read such a limitation into the NDA.
- Because there was no s. 7 breach, the Court did not proceed to a Charter s. 1 justification analysis.

## Legal Principles

- Charter s. 7 overbreadth asks whether a law’s means are broader than necessary for its objective; overbreadth exists where some applications have no rational connection to the law’s purpose.
- Proper characterization of legislative purpose is central to the overbreadth inquiry.
- For NDA ss. 130(1)(a) and 117(f), the relevant purpose is maintaining discipline, efficiency, and morale by providing a distinct military justice system for those subject to the Code of Service Discipline, including jurisdiction over ordinary federal offences committed by service members.
- Status-based military jurisdiction over federal offences can be rationally connected to maintaining discipline and morale even when the conduct occurs in civilian contexts.
- Courts should not “read in” limiting requirements absent textual support or constitutional necessity.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld the NDA provisions permitting courts martial to try service members for most federal offences based on military status, holding the scheme rationally connected to maintaining an effective military justice system and not overbroad under Charter s. 7.


R. v. Moriarity, 2015 SCC 55, [2015] 3 S.C.R. 485 (Can. 2015)