Justice Committee on Oct. 28th, 2014

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you.

Mr. Landry, I'd like to discuss a much-talked-about topic with you, the victim surcharge.

We noted your request for additional funding.

The victim surcharge is an amount paid to the provinces to fund agencies that advocate for victims. The surcharge has come under fire by those who argue that some criminals cannot afford to pay it.

In the situation you talked about, clergy members or the clergy ended up having to pay the surcharge. It's a different story when individuals can't afford to pay the surcharge.

Do you support the mandatory victim surcharge, as proposed in Bill C-32?

[Lucien Landry]

Yes, we fully support it. In fact, we had expressed to you our support for Bill C-32 in its entirety.

With the chair's permission, I'd like to say that we were forced to seek out a really innovative solution in light of our meagre resources. What we did was use community agency support programs to access the expertise of university law faculties. And thanks to Pro Bono Québec, we were able to get law students working with us to help prepare our comments.

I'm speaking to the committee chair. The students are in exams right now. They have to finish what they are working on and present it to us. We could then forward it to you. We saw that Bill C-32 has 56 pages, which is an enormous amount of information for us to cover. So we got creative and partnered with law faculties to help us prepare the recommendations and questions we have for you.

We've told you today what we plan to do, but we are, of course, requesting your permission to send the document to you, as well as to the government party and the official opposition.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Is the document in both official languages?

Any further documentation that you need to send, send it to the clerk. He will get it translated and distribute it to all members of the committee. You're more than welcome to do that, and we'd appreciate it if that could happen before we finish this study in about three weeks.

[Lucien Landry]

You can count on us. We will definitely send it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you for those questions and those answers.

Our next questioner is from the Liberal Party of Canada, Madam Bennett.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thank you to the witnesses. This was extremely helpful.

We've heard that this bill is a good first step but that there have to be resources to back it up. I would like to ask any of you, if you felt there were amendments that would make the bill stronger or some commitments of resources, how those would look. I was particularly taken with Ms. Handy's remarks around having places for safe disclosure for children, because then you're more likely to get a conviction. I think a conviction is part of a victim's rights. The perpetrator shouldn't get off because there weren't resources to take the testimony in a safe way where people tell the whole story. I think we see that in...in abuse of physicians, by physicians, in women's situations.

I also heard from the police that you would like to see remedies; that means access to information in many languages, and how that could look. Should that be explained in the act? Particularly with indigenous languages, do people feel they really do know what their rights are as they enter into this place, as Timea has done with her clients? Maybe the police association or the native women would have an idea of what it would cost to actually support this bill properly. What kind of budget commitment would it take to show that this government takes this seriously?

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Madam Bennett, is there anyone in particular you'd like to answer that question?

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

We'll start with the law enforcement people and see if they can give us some numbers.

[D/Chief Jill Skinner]

One of the specific areas we spoke about was the cost of training. The Canadian Police Knowledge Network is one example of an opportunity for police officers across the country to receive consistent information. This allows them to receive the training through electronic means. They go on the web and they receive that training. We provide them training through CPKN right now for thousands of topics. This could be an additional topic they would receive.

I think consistency across the country is one of the most important things for us. Each of our provinces has different legislation from a victim's perspective, but if we provide the training to our front-line folks, I think we're going to get the final message out to them. They are the pointy end of the stick. They are the ones dealing with victims every single day. For us to be able to provide that training, I think, is essential. Preparing that training is obviously one area that would require funding.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Timea has her hand up.

Certainly the indigenous victims quite often feel uncomfortable or feel that nobody has their back as they walk through the system.

[Timea E. Nagy]

I think what's extremely unique about our organization, and the reason we have been so successful, is that we walk the victim, which is why we're called Walk With Me, through the system from the minute we meet them. We are successful at getting them to actually give a statement, to stay with their stories, to go through the court, and to get those convictions of human trafficking, which you have seen striking Canada. I like to think we have done the work we have partly because we walk them through the system.

We do have victim services and we have victim and witness assistance programs in certain provinces. I have travelled in Canada and there are provinces or territories in which they do not exist. Cases in places where it does exist and where the victims of any crime are put in touch directly with victim services and with a victim and witness assistance program are extremely successful at the end of the day. Those programs, like victim services, are not only helping police officers by taking the load off of them having to be there constantly for the victim but also helping the victim tremendously by guiding them through the process.

There are a lot of organizations already in place. There are a lot of things we don't actually need to reinvent in the bill. It's just a simple matter of education and of being consistent.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Who funds you?

[Timea E. Nagy]

Our agency is a little bit different from victims services and the victim-witness assistance program. We just started five years ago. Everybody funds us except the government—yet.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Timea E. Nagy]

It's private funding so far.

There are many reasons why we....The truth is that we haven't really applied for bigger grants yet from the government because we are a small agency and because we don't have the specific requirements that victims services or the victim-witness assistance program would have. That is the truth. That's why. We have been approached many times that they would like to fund our programs; we are just not ready yet as an agency to get that on the record.

But there are programs out there. Consistency would be great, and just more education for those agencies that are already in place.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Would the Native Women's Association like to respond?

[Teresa Edwards, Director, International Affairs and Human Rights, Native Women's Association of Canada]

Sure.

I don't have a specific amount I could list, but I know for aboriginal victims they feel completely lost within the system. In fact they face added discrimination by not having access to information in their own language and in their own culture. Cultural behaviours are interpreted wrongly by judges, lawyers, and those in the courtroom. Victims are re-victimized in the process and don't have the supports available to them in a cultural way or in their own language certainly.

Having online services just demonstrates the lack of knowledge that people have of what aboriginal people have in communities. They don't have clean water, let alone computers to access online services for victims. So when we're talking about the ability to access these great services that accompany this bill, it's for very privileged people, right? That discounts many aboriginal victims, just so we're clear.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much for those questions. Thank you for those answers.

Our next questioner from the Conservative Party is Mr. Dechert.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to each of our witnesses.

Ms. Nagy, it's good to see you again. I want to take this opportunity to thank you for your leadership in helping the victims of human trafficking. We last met at the Freedom Walk in Toronto a few weeks ago, and you made a very inspiring speech there. I know you've written at least two books to help police officers and those who counsel the victims of human trafficking. I think it's very important that we acknowledge that work that you and your organization have done.

You mentioned in your opening remarks that you were happy with the new section 486.31 of the Criminal Code as proposed by clause 17 of Bill C-32. I note it provides for the non-disclosure of the identity of a witness, in a number of circumstances, and requires the court to consider whether the witness needs protection from intimidation or retaliation, whether there's a need to protect the security of anyone who is known to the witness—I guess a family member, or friend, or associate of the witness—and also for the purposes of encouraging the reporting of offences.

Can you tell us why that's important to victims of human trafficking and the people who you serve?

[Timea E. Nagy]

Sure. I'll start with my own story. When I was in court testifying against my perpetrator, his brother was sitting in the crowd constantly showing me in court that he was going to cut my throat when I finished my statement, and there was nothing done about it. That happened in court, so it certainly made me think twice about coming back to testify the next day; I did anyway.

With regard to the victims we're working with, and ourselves, there are two things. When we work with victims, we become targets also, and sometimes we actually get called to testify as a witness in court. This means they actually ask for our full name, where we work, our office address, and so on. In one of the human trafficking cases in Hamilton, it later became public knowledge that a contract killer was supposed to come after everybody who helped the victims, including me. I was on that list. So I really wasn't happy to hear that I might be called as a witness where I would have to disclose my full name, address, and licence plate, and name everybody that we work with. That's a constant concern for our front-line workers, and even myself, when we have to go to court and testify against traffickers and brutal criminal organizations, so I am very happy to see these amendments.

When we talk about witnesses and victims, if you look at the bigger picture for human trafficking victims, currently there's nothing in it for them to come forward. They get nothing out of it. They don't even get their truth out. They don't even get the satisfaction to go to court and be heard. It's not only that they're not being heard, they're actually crucified by the defence lawyer, and usually, by the end of the court proceedings, she feels more victimized than she ever had before.

We were in court only a few weeks ago and the victim was asked where she was staying at that time, while the trafficker was in the room. We had been trying to hide her, and she was trying to say that she didn't want to say because she didn't feel safe and comfortable disclosing that information, while the judge ordered the defence lawyer to actually get where she was staying on the record. Then they asked where her family was. It cost us $5,000 to relocate the entire family, and then in court we needed to disclose where the family just moved to. So there's a—

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Thank you; I know that time's running a little short, so I'd like to ask you another question.

You also mentioned proposed paragraph 718(a) and the amendment to the Criminal Code that would require the court to consider the harm done to victims, or the community, with respect to whatever the unlawful offence was. Mr. Hooper also referred to this when he appeared before our committee last week.

Can you tell us why you think that would be important to the victims of human trafficking?

[Timea E. Nagy]

In the past, their story was only heard through their victim impact statement during sentencing. For the most part, in every case, we heard from the judge and the defence lawyer a lot about the accused's past and why we should take that into consideration, but we heard very, very little about what was done to the victim, and most judges didn't usually voice the victim's story.

We felt that the court and the justice system wasn't really hearing the victim when it came to sentencing. It is almost as if the victim is not even part of her own case; the victim has nothing to do with the outcome. So we are really happy to see that from now on the judges will have to include the victim's story and the impact on the victim in their sentencing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

One minute.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a question for the Native Women's Association and Dr. Harvard.

You'll know, Dr. Harvard, that when the Special Committee on Violence Against Indigenous Women heard from some of the families of victims of missing and murdered aboriginal women, almost every one of them mentioned a concern about the lack of information. One of the biggest complaints was that when their loved one went missing, they rarely got information from the police on what was being done to find the person. When there was a prosecution, they found it very difficult to get information on the prosecution, on the process before, during, and after trial, or at the time of sentencing.

So the victims bill of rights, Bill C-32, guarantees certain rights to information for victims. How do you think that will be viewed by aboriginal victims?

[Dr. Dawn Harvard]

It's very often known that in society in general, knowledge is power. One of the biggest concerns of the families has been lack of access to information, lack of knowledge. It makes the victims feel, as you mentioned, even more victimized, and it prevents the families, the victims from having the opportunity to basically be human beings in this society, to have human dignity, when it is their family member who has gone missing. They are just left feeling excluded and therefore re-victimized by the process.

Anything that is going to allow an additional access to information is positive, but as mentioned before, given language differences, given educational differences, given lack of access to basic communication—phone, Internet, these types of things—there are going to be differences, and there will be difficulties in having access to the information if we don't acknowledge those differences.