I think what it addresses is accountability and transparency. I think a lot of victims' rights groups and governments have made great strides in opening up the system to the public, and this is just one small gap that seems to have been overlooked.
I think there has been a lot of forward movement in terms of victims participating in the system and having no surprises. I'm pretty involved. I do a lot of reading. I do a lot of talking. I do a lot of research. I'm still being surprised by things along the way. This was a big one. I think that's the issue. It's the transparency and the accountability, and sort of keeping everybody honest.
It's hard to know what goes on in a warden's review behind closed doors and to not allow the victims up to that point access to any information. That's the part that's difficult to deal with. You can work your way through the system when you know what you're dealing with, and you come across these small things.
This was a big one. This one just shuts everyone out except the offender, and it's a bit of an advantage to the offender.
If they want to avoid the Parole Board, they can just wait until they are in that window, especially in a women's prison where the population is a little bit less than a men's prison. It's a much more intimate setting, and the institution staff get to know the offenders quite well so you don't have that objectivity you would have before a Parole Board. Then you question what was behind those decisions because you're not allowed into the process. I think it addresses that. which is very important.