Evidence of meeting #96 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 children.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Élisabeth Brière Liberal Sherbrooke, QC
It goes back to what you were saying earlier: you have to take the context into account.
Lawyer and Project Manager, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
Yes, that's exactly it.
It also helps preclude cases where victims would be falsely accused. Having spoken to stakeholders in England and Scotland, we understand that the fear of false accusations was one of their concerns, but it has not proved to be well founded in either England or Scotland.
Liberal
Élisabeth Brière Liberal Sherbrooke, QC
In your text, you say that you have a concern about the length of the sentence. Under the Criminal Code, criminal harassment is punishable by ten years' imprisonment. In the case of the offence covered by the bill, the sentence is set at five years.
I'd like to hear your opinion on this.
February 26th, 2024 / 11:30 a.m.
Lawyer and Project Manager, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
In our opinion, it is important that the sentence reflect not only the consequences of these actions on the victims and on the women's lives, but also their objective seriousness.
Stalking is one of the tactics, one of the manifestations of coercive control. So, we simply find it logical that the maximum sentence should be at least ten years, and not five years as currently provided for in Bill C‑332.
Liberal
Liberal
Élisabeth Brière Liberal Sherbrooke, QC
You may be aware that we MPs have received a series of letters asking us to include animals in the bill. We'll be receiving a witness shortly who will tell us more about this, but I'd still like to hear your views on it.
Co-responsible, Political Affairs, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
It's obvious that, for spouses exercising coercive control, all means are good. Some will go after animals to get to their victim, to worry her, to tell her that next time they'll go after her rather than their pet or farm animal.
Lawyer and Project Manager, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
I'd like to take the liberty of adding something. In Scotland, survivors were invited to participate in the consultation on the wording of the law, and pets were among the examples that were subsequently added.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab
Thank you very much.
Mr. Fortin now has the floor for six minutes.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Barrette, Ms. Riendeau and Ms. Cross, thank you for being with us today.
I'll start quickly with you, Ms. Cross. In your testimony, you proposed a number of recommendations. I think there were seven, but I'm not sure. I was looking for them because I hadn't written them down. Five minutes ago, you tabled your document in the committee's digital binder, but I haven't had time to read it either, as you can imagine. I did, however, consult it briefly, and did not see the recommendations.
Could we have your recommendations in writing if they are not already included in the brief?
Advocacy Director, Luke's Place Support and Resource Centre for Women and Children
They appear at the end of the brief. I am also happy to provide you with my speaking notes, which list them.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Thank you.
Ms. Barrette, you answered a question from my colleague Ms. Brière by saying that it may be easier to prove controlling and coercive behaviours than to prove certain other acts of violence.
Don't you fear that the ease with which such proof can be established could lead to abuse? For example, people could be accused or found guilty of certain things when in reality, these were not necessarily the kind of actions the bill was intended to punish.
Lawyer and Project Manager, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
In fact, not everything becomes coercive control. We're really talking about the presence of behavioural patterns. An investigation would still be done. It's really by looking at the history and the context that we can see if, indeed, there's a repetition or a pattern of behaviour that's ongoing and that built up over time. The idea is not to qualify each individual gesture as coercive control. Rather, it's to look at the experiences of victims who have endured such a situation over a long period of time.
In fact, the presence of a broad and inclusive definition, accompanied by examples, would come to set parameters and facilitate the work of police officers and prosecutors in this process.
Co-responsible, Political Affairs, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
If I may, I would add that, in our work with victims of domestic violence, we see quite clearly that they are dealing with behaviour that is ongoing, that is repeated over time, not a few isolated acts. This behaviour extends over weeks, even months. Sometimes, control can set in more quickly. Either way, it comes through very clearly in our talks with victims.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
You just spoke, Ms. Barrette, about the possibility of a list of behaviours. Can you or Ms. Riendeau give me examples of what could be included in this list?
There are the classic examples that everyone understands, like controlling or withholding ID, withholding car keys, or not wanting your spouse to work. Are there any other examples, apart from those, that might shed some light?
Lawyer and Project Manager, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
There are basically two ways of looking at things.
Generally speaking, we can think of examples such as isolation, abuse, surveillance, threatening behaviours, control, monitoring of daily activities, micromanagement of daily life, humiliation or blame.
For more concrete and detailed examples, you could consult Australian law in Queensland. We can provide you with the information following the meeting. This law really goes into detail by mentioning very concrete acts, much like what you're proposing.
As part of the project on improving judicial practice, we've developed tools with multiple real-life examples. So it's important to us that these examples be part of the wording.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Thank you. If you have any examples to submit, that could indeed be helpful to us.
I'll move on to another topic. You'll excuse me for going from soup to nuts, but you'll understand that we don't have much time.
Proposed subsection 264.01(3) reads:
(3) For the purposes of subsection (1), two persons are connected if (b) they are members of the same household, and [...] (ii) are relatives, or [...]
For the purposes of interpreting this provision, should it be made clear that we are talking here about parents of the same child? I'm thinking, for example, of a situation where two roommates each had their own children. Could they find themselves stuck in an awkward situation because of the way this provision is interpreted?
Have you given any thought to this part of the bill?
Co-responsible, Political Affairs, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
What we wanted, in fact, was to replace this proposed provision completely, so as to make greater use of the definition of “intimate partner” already in the Criminal Code. So we didn't go into those details.
Lawyer and Project Manager, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
I'd just like to add one thing. Whether it's a case where the parents have a child together or a case where one of the parents has a child from another relationship, for example, the child can be the victim of coercive control. I would even say that the danger to the child's safety increases when we're dealing with a child from another relationship.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
I still have several questions about children who are victims of controlling and coercive behaviour.
Of course, we want parents to be able to control their children. Where do you draw the line between essential behaviours, those that should be tolerated, and intolerable behaviours, in parent-child relationships?
Co-responsible, Political Affairs, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
We're not talking here about parents disciplining their children. We're talking about children who are covictims of domestic violence. As soon as coercive control is exercised by a spouse, it becomes important to examine the impact this has on children.
Co-responsible, Political Affairs, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
For example, I think of a child who lives in a climate of terror because his mother is abused by her partner. We consider this child to be a covictim of domestic violence or coercive control. I'm also thinking of a child who gets hurt trying to defend their mother. That's a more direct example. That said, it's really being exposed to domestic violence, as described in Quebec's Youth Protection Act.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lena Metlege Diab
Thank you very much, Ms. Riendeau.
The final six minutes in the first round will go to Mr. Garrison, please.