Evidence of meeting #160 for Public Safety and National Security in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was offences.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:20 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Native Women's Association of Canada
I think Mr. Cudjoe was going to expand on this issue earlier and perhaps this would be a good opportunity.
4:20 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
In order to catch the ones that were related strictly to the possession of marijuana charges, you go back to the wording in the charges. Most times it will say you were charged with possession of marijuana on day x and were asked by the court to come on this day and you missed court. Also, on the possession of marijuana charge, it will show that you didn't attend court. Therefore, you get the two pieces of information together and you can prove that the two were directly related.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Thank you to both witnesses for being here today.
I would like to start with you, sir. You just mentioned that you can go back and check. We've had witnesses here, department officials, who told us the other day, when we were talking about how to deal with those people who might have had a charge reduced from something maybe a little more complicated to minor possession, that there's no way they can really check into that, that it's too complicated. They would only deal with the charge that they were convicted on.
What you and your counterpart here are saying is that they want to deal with the other charges, such as subsections 145(4) and 145(5), section 733 and subsection 145(3). Some of these might have been summary, and some were indictable, depending on the circumstances. Someone is going to have to look into that and you're complicating the whole process.
Some states in the United States have come out with a very simple program of which I am in favour. You just press a button. Someone designs the program that goes into CIPC and cleans out those charges for minor possession and they're gone.
Now you're talking about contacting people. How many of your clients can tell you their addresses since 1996, or where would we get hold of them since 1996? Where have they been?
It needs to be a much simpler process than you are explaining to us, because you're saying some of your clients do not have the capability of filling these forms out and may not be able to tell you the addresses. We need to be able to get it to the public somehow.
The simplest system, which I want you both to comment on, is just a program that can be written in this day and age of science and technology and computer programming. A program can be built that can eliminate it just by the press of a button and let the computer do the work instead of putting a human factor in there.
I see you both putting in a lot of human factor, which is going to be too complicated.
You can start, and Ms. Finestone finish.
4:20 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
I have just two issues to respond to. On the first one, when I'm referring to contacting people, that is to inform them that the automatic process has taken place. It doesn't complicate the pushing of the button. The button can always be pushed. It is whether they know if that the system has happened.
The second part, where it becomes complicated with the human factor, is when you're trying to relate your charges to the possession of marijuana. The marijuana offence can always be gone with a button. We don't want to deprive everybody....
[Technical difficulty--Editor]
Then it's up to the government to decide whether they're going to look further into filtered or peer-filtered compliance, and so on. However, to mix the two together at this stage takes....
[Technical difficulty--Editor]
We're referring to the harms that have been done to people as a result of their original charge and we want to go further. That's a second question that is nowhere in the legislation that I see and we're just asking the committee to open its mind to that.
4:20 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Native Women's Association of Canada
One other issue we're talking about is that people tend to be overcharged. In terms of plea deals and the other things you're talking about, and how we ended up with this simple possession charge, sometimes the Crown's just flinging whatever can stick at the wall. We shouldn't let that detract from needing to take away any simple possession conviction on the criminal record.
I think it is important to do it in stages. If it's easy, do the ones with just simple possession. But I think what we're both trying to say is that the reality for the constituents we serve is that it won't help very much, so we need to continue to keep engaging with our organizations.
I know NWAC can do the legal education and tell people what's involved, how to apply, where to connect to do that. There are organizations that do this. But we need to get this process started.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
If the record were automatically gone for everybody who had simple possession, wouldn't the word get out on the street that your record's gone? I have a very difficult time understanding your trying to contact these individuals with a notification that they now don't have a criminal record. If it were automatically done with all criminal records dealing with simple possession in Canada, then why would we need to notify people? It should get out there...newspaper article.
4:25 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Native Women's Association of Canada
I think it should be automatic.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
May 6th, 2019 / 4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Thanks for all the different suggestions we're getting today. Obviously, there's a lot we're thinking about in terms of amendments to this bill and making it better. Thank you for contributing to that.
We've talked quite a lot about expungements in the last few meetings. The process of expungement is very new. It wasn't really in existence up until last year. I don't think there's been a lot of experience in undertaking that process.
Mr. Cudjoe, have you helped people with pardons in the past, and what was the experience like for you or your client when you were helping them with that?
4:25 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
I have helped people with pardons in the past, but I should say it wasn't my main area. It was just helping them fill in the forms.
Most of my clients had very low earnings, so this had to be by a pro bono process. Raising the funds to apply for the pardon was the biggest hurdle for many of these people.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
That's interesting. Was it funding for the application that was the hurdle?
4:25 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
The funding for the application was the biggest hurdle for many young people, because they were in either a paycheque-to-paycheque situation or worse. It's about coming up with the $400 to start. It was really difficult for them.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
It's even worse at this point, because the previous government raised it to six hundred and something. This piece of legislation is addressing that. The fee for the application will no longer exist.
You said the biggest hurdle is with regard to employment and that a pardon or an expungement would help a person when it comes to employment. After helping these clients, do you know if they had an easier time once they were able to get a pardon?
4:25 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
Because as I've said, they're starting from very basic jobs—McDonald's, Walmart, factory jobs—and it's a question that's asked. You can't lie on the form. You can't say....
I'm sorry; I didn't mean to interrupt.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Sorry, it's just because I have such minimal time.
If a person were to get an expungement instead of a pardon, would they be able to answer the question of whether they'd ever plead guilty to a crime in any other way?
4:25 p.m.
Vice-President, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
No, you wouldn't be able to answer that in a different way. But if the question were, “Have you ever been convicted of an offence”, then yes they could. That's another question that's asked.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
What question they ask, and how they choose to frame it, depends on the employer—
