I can take the question, and, Roxana, please add to it.
If Canada recognizes coercive control as a Criminal Code offence, it's another section on the books.
My challenge is looking at and thinking about what England, Wales and Scotland have done. Scotland's model is definitely seen as the gold standard. The studies coming out of those jurisdictions have repeatedly told us that a number of people who were either convicted or charged with coercive control could have been charged under a number of statutes that were already available to the prosecutors in those jurisdictions.
I think it's the same case here in Canada. If you think about what coercive and controlling behaviour is, then criminal harassment, assault, sexual assault, forcible confinement, human trafficking, uttering threats, fraud and stalking are all criminalized behaviours. My challenge remains that when we have so many tools in the box, why do we want to add this one more thing, which is the contextual nature of the crime, instead of giving proper education to our police officers, prosecutors and judges in understanding the context?
Adding this one more thing would unfortunately, in my opinion, add another layer of barriers in access to justice for the survivors. Now they have one more thing. It might also give them the false notion that coercive control is now criminalized. In reality, the “beyond reasonable doubt” test would still remain the same. They would still have to prove all of those actions or those situations that I just listed, and more.
I really, definitely find it really challenging to think about how it will solve a problem that lies in lack of understanding of the context by the frontline responders, prosecutors and decision-makers. I do not believe that it will actually break the cycle of violence, as suggested by you, honourable member. In fact, that's also the evidence coming out of the countries and jurisdictions where it has been criminalized.