Evidence of meeting #72 for Justice and Human Rights in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was trafficker.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Thank you.
I'll stay with Ms. Way.
It seems that one of the goals—perhaps not the main goal—of this Bill S-224, this amendment, is to make it easier to obtain convictions for trafficking offences. I'm just wondering, Ms. Way, if you could comment on whether that would be the case. Also, what are the other factors that might be causing lower rates of convictions for this crime?
Barrister, As an Individual
You've asked a very big question there, sir.
Certainly the criminal justice system is chronically underfunded. We are losing section 11(b) cases because courts are taking too long to complete a case. The case is therefore stayed by the court. These human trafficking cases are very complex.
One thing I have not heard discussed yet is that very often it's not one person who is charged with human trafficking; it will be several. Recently I've had a number of cases where there have been four defendants—four people on that indictment. That makes these very complicated cases. It takes a long time for them to work their way through the system. We need more resources in the court system. We need more courts. We need more judges. We need more Crowns. We need more funding for legal services for complainants. All of those things come to bear.
I do not think as a society we can touch the presumption of innocence and the burden that's on the Crown now. That is what makes Canadian criminal law so fair to all of us, even when it leads to more wrongful acquittals than wrongful convictions. It protects us all. My concern is that the proposed amendment would ultimately be found to be unconstitutional and would cause more problems in the system. It would result in more cases not being brought to justice.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
You mentioned that often there is more than one person on that charge. Do you think that, if we broaden this definition by taking away the question of fear, there's a danger of capturing people who are, perhaps, not really in the trafficking business or into these cases of trafficking, which might be one of the unintended consequences? Is that something you're concerned about?
Barrister, As an Individual
Here I think that what you may be referring to is the possibility of someone who drives the sex worker somewhere, that that person, somebody who's affiliated but who's not exploiting the complainant, may be caught up in this. Is that what your question is?
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Yes, that's more or less it. There could be a number of different tasks these people have.
Barrister, As an Individual
Yes. I don't really think that is something.... I don't instinctively go to that particular concern. Sex work in and of itself is not illegal in Canada. I have represented sex workers who are completely self-employed, declare their income and are independent business people. That is not criminal.
I don't really think this amendment would lead to that problem, but also, as I've repeatedly said, I don't think the amendment is necessary and I don't think the Crown now has to prove that the complainant was fearful. They have to prove objectively that they could have been fearful.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
I'll continue by going back to the business of resources. Are there investigative resources that need to be strengthened in terms of policing, things like that? Where do we need those extra resources to ensure that we can deal with these cases properly?
Barrister, As an Individual
I'm quite sure that any justice participant who comes before the committee will say that their particular sector needs more resources. What I can say is that the City of Toronto has a new courthouse, Ontario Court of Justice, and every day a number of those courts are unable to open because of a lack of staffing. At the very baseline, we cannot open all the courts that are available or that should be available, and we cannot run all of those cases. That, in turn, has a ripple effect that everything gets delayed and pushed down the road.
When you're asked about resources, it starts from the most basic level of the system.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Randeep Sarai
Thank you, Mr. Cannings.
I want to thank all of the witnesses for attending.
Thank you, Ms. Diamond, Ms. Way and Ms. Gee.
Ms. Gee, you had your hand up. I'm wondering if you had a point to make before we end this.
Executive Director, A New Day - Youth & Adult Services
I did. I want to clear up something that Ms. Way said. She was talking about a sex worker and a driver. When a youth is being trafficked, they're not a sex worker—and you know this—under the age of 18, usually the drivers are complicit and are part of what's going on in the course of a situation. That is a completely different conversation.
One of the challenges that I'm hearing here right now is that we're talking about funding for court systems when we should be talking about victims and advocacy, and we should be talking about prevention and education in our schools and for parents and caregivers. That is not even being discussed.
I understand that the court system is overburdened, and I don't know how they answer that, because that's not my lane of work. My lane of work is these young women and young men who have been exploited since they were children. I think that's where our focus needs to be.
If we're going to amend the law and it's going to help support them come forward to provide a statement where they don't have the burden of proving that they were scared the entire time, then that's something we need to consider.
Executive Director, A New Day - Youth & Adult Services
I'll be quite frank with you: I don't care about the traffickers' rights.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Randeep Sarai
Thank you, Ms. Gee.
I want to thank all three witnesses. Thank you for the time—and I apologize for the interruptions we had because of votes. We thank you for your patience. I will conclude that part.
I have some quick committee business. I guess Mr. Moore has left.
We got a letter from FINA, the finance committee, wanting to know if we want to study any of the pre-budget consultations for the fall. We have to let them know by July 31. I guess they want to offset some of their burden by not doing any justice-related ones. If you let me know, I will answer the letter based on the feedback I get from the vice-chairs as well as other members.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
On that issue, I think it might be worthwhile for us to make a contribution. However, I don't think our committee should commit all the time it will have available in the fall. I suggest looking at our list of committee business and our priorities when we come back in September, not before. It's a little too soon, and we don't yet know what will be on the menu in September.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Randeep Sarai
Thank you, Mr. Fortin.
Unfortunately, Mr. Moore is not here, so I'll get his feedback, as well. I'm of the same inkling of not doing that. We have a lot of studies to do, and we'll get overburdened with those. Some of those will come our way anyway if they're legislation. I'm inclined to say the same. I will also speak to Mr. Garrison, when I get a chance, and then I will clear it with all of you before.
Thank you.
The meeting is adjourned.