Thank you, Chair, and thank you to committee for inviting me here today. It is very nice to see all of you again.
My name is Jennifer Dunn. I am the executive director of the London Abused Women's Centre, or LAWC, here in London, Ontario. LAWC is a feminist organization that supports and advocates for personal, social and systemic change directed at ending male violence against women and girls.
LAWC is a non-residential agency that provides women and girls over the age of 12 who have been abused, assaulted, exploited or trafficked, or who have experienced non-state torture, with immediate access to long-term, trauma-informed, woman-centred counselling, advocacy and support.
We know that under the law in Canada, a person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until they are proven guilty. Granting bail means they can remain out of jail while they move through the justice system. We also know that the court process can take many, many months.
I read that the cost of keeping an accused person in custody is a lot more expensive than the cost of supervising them in the community while they wait for their turn in court, but I ask this: It is a lot more expensive to whom? What is the cost to a woman who has to serve a life sentence for being brutally assaulted at the hands of a man while he is out on bail?
At the London Abused Women's Centre, we have a group of women with lived experience who are paid for their time to help advise us on our work. A couple of weeks ago, I had the privilege of sitting with this group of women for about an hour. I said to them, “Let's talk about Canada's bail system.” I took the time to listen to every story they wanted to share. With their permission, I bring some of this to you today.
I quote: “They gave him every accommodation. They wanted to give him consideration of not interfering with his work. He is a well-established businessman.”
I spoke with a woman victim whose perpetrator is on bail. He is allowed to go to work. She also works there, I might add. He is supposed to be supervised at work. He is supposed to stay a certain distance from her, but this simply does not happen. Because this particular man is in a very high position of power, the business seemingly looks the opposite way. Firmer bail conditions in this situation could help this woman to work without fear. She isn't the one at fault. She shouldn't have to find another job to stay safe.
I will quote again: “The onus is on you to keep yourself safe, instead of the onus being on the abuser to follow his conditions.” I heard from another woman, whom I quote: “As a victim, I feel I have to prove that I'm the victim more than he has been accused of his actions.”
One woman said, “My abuser was arrested in my driveway for domestic assault. Less than 12 hours later, he was out on bail. At that time, the abuse had gone on for many, many years, but I had never reported the abuse previously. He breached his conditions every single day and had no true consequences.”
On Monday, Justice Minister David Lametti said, “Canadians deserve to be...and...deserve to feel safe.” I read that the minister said it's “important to note that bail laws are clear that detention of an accused person is justified if it is necessary to protect the safety of the public”, but on the ground, from the London Abused Women's Centre, this doesn't particularly make sense to us.
We have seen instances in which police have issued public safety warnings, yet a repeat offender continues to receive bail. I'm referring to an ex-police officer who spent more than two-thirds of his career suspended with pay for criminal charges and professional misconduct. He was charged with sexual assault, sexual assault with choking, sexual assault causing bodily harm and forcible confinement, and the list goes on. It was in December that the police first issued a public safety warning with his picture and some of the names he has been using online. He now faces charges involving four different women and has pled guilty to breaching his bail conditions. Just last week, on February 27, he received bail again.
We see time and time again privilege in the system, where perpetrators who have money for the best lawyers are receiving all the benefits. Even the surety system is made for people with money. The ease with which a perpetrator can receive bail is often seen as excusing the offender's actions, can show a failure to hold offenders accountable and can be seen as minimizing violent crimes.
The women I spoke to are fearful. They are fearful not only of their perpetrators, but of the system that is supposed to be protecting them. I quote: “He scores goals, he's well established, he's well known. Bail shouldn't be based on privilege, but sometimes it is.”
In closing, the London Abused Women's Centre and the women we serve would like to recommend that this committee be sure to use a lens that focuses on those who are most vulnerable. Think of violence against women while studying Canada's bail system. The government must prioritize the rights of victims.
Thank you.