Special Committee on Violence Against Indigenous Women Committee on Jan. 30th, 2014

[Susan O'Sullivan]

If somebody is going to have a right, they have to know that they have that right—

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, London North Centre, ON]

Right.

[Susan O'Sullivan]

—and they need to be informed of that.

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, London North Centre, ON]

Do you find that a lot of individuals around the aboriginal community are not informed of their rights, or of how they can seek help if they're not getting help?

[Susan O'Sullivan]

The criminal justice system is complex and complicated.

First of all, when somebody does want to come forward because they've been a victim of a crime, they are either going to find out from somebody else in that community what happens when they do go forward.... That's why I go back to how people are treated and how they find out if they should go forward. It's a critical piece.

You've hit on something very important, because in order for somebody to know what their rights are, they have to be informed of what they are; otherwise, they are not to going to be able to exercise them.

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, London North Centre, ON]

Could you identify some of the issues that might be unique to victims of crime who are aboriginal?

[Susan O'Sullivan]

Yes.

Obviously, for example, language, culturally appropriate, the level of victimization we've seen, the vulnerabilities we've seen in the studies.... What we're trying to look at are some of those core pieces that an inquiry would help us to really build on. We know about—and I think Kim has spoken quite eloquently to this—some of the challenges they face, particularly the women, the aboriginal women. There's a lot that goes around this in terms of sometimes getting a comment like “Have you been drinking?” Many people, many victims, have concurrent issues. We're all well aware of that. It goes with victimization, in many cases.

When victims do come forward, we need to be able to ensure not only that that they can be believed and that the system can come in to support them, but also—I used that one brief example from up north about understanding—different languages mean different things. As I said, if you've never been in the criminal justice system, it's a very scary place to be. It's very complex and complicated, so an ability for them to be informed and to be supported, and to have some advocacy for them as well....

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Am I still okay?

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

You have about 35 seconds.

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, London North Centre, ON]

Do you think that victims services should be tailored to fit certain cultural communities, or do you think a victim is a victim regardless of what community they come from?

[Susan O'Sullivan]

It needs to be culturally appropriate, and those supports need to be in place.

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

You have 20 seconds.

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, London North Centre, ON]

Good, I have one question for Ms. Pate.

Ms. Pate, there are opportunities to address violence against aboriginal women and girls at every stage of the justice system. I just want to know what steps you believe we should take to tangibly improve the system's response and the relationship between justice professionals, which would include the police and aboriginal people.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Ms. Pate, a very brief comment.

[Kim Pate]

I won't repeat what I already said, but it needs to be highlighted that the reason Human Rights Watch chose the title of the report, “Those Who Take Us Away” was, to pick up on Sue's point, that was their language, what they called the police. It's telling that it wouldn't be who you would go to if you interpreted or understood these people to be people who were taking you away. There are some fundamental issues there.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Thanks, Ms. Pate.

Thank you, Ms. Truppe.

Ms. Bennett, for seven minutes.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Thanks very much.

First, both of you again have called for a national commission of inquiry, and in spite of the parliamentary secretary's quoting Shawn Atleo, it is important that we get back on the record that the AFN has also called for a national commission of public inquiry, as has NWAC, all the premiers, etc., so you're in good company.

Why this panel is so important is what we hear across this country is that people seem to care about victims' rights, unless the victim is indigenous, and then all of a sudden they are blamed. That includes those who aren't with us, and it's only their families now who have been victimized by this loss.

When we began this committee a year ago, the rate of murder clearance across Canada was about 84%. At that time the rate of murder clearance fell to 50% if the victim was indigenous. This is appalling to Canadians to understand it could be that different. What we have heard is somehow the investigation or the follow-up is not of the same quality because the victim, the murdered or missing individual.... It was viewed to be inevitable because somebody worked on the street or had problems with addiction or those things, and so they didn't actually follow it up properly.

What has been your experience how we would explain the differential for being able to solve these? Without solving them, we can't really prevent it, and without solving them, the families have no closure, have no real trust in the system, which begets and begets.

Can you explain how this can be so different if the victim is indigenous?

[Susan O'Sullivan]

I don't have the information that you're asking me on the percentages, but I will say this. Every victim that I talked to across this country said, “I don't want what happened to me or to my family to happen to anyone else.” They need to know that their loss or their harm is going to result in change. This is why it is so important that we have a forum, such as an inquiry, that is going to allow us to examine these and listen to those families and to have Canadians, all of us, have a piece to play in this.

We need to move forward and to be able to make a difference, but we need to do that based on listening, based on hearing those stories, based on including them, so when we look for those solutions, they are involved and they are the ones that we're hearing from.

To answer your question, if we want to see the solving rates go up, we want to see that people will come forward and trust the systems, they need to be included in those solutions and in the development of those plans.

I did have the privilege of attending the Edmonton conference that AFN and the Native Women's Association hosted. It was a very powerful time to listen to the voices that were there. They did have the discussion on the national action plan and what should go into that. We have all read what they have put forward. There are opportunities for us to continue to build on that.

I can't answer your question about what the difference is in rates of solvability and what were the instances around that because I don't have that, but I can tell you what has to happen in this country is we do need to make sure we have a solid path forward that includes the aboriginal people in the solutions.

[Kim Pate]

I think the differential is very much based on inequality. If you start out in a less equal position, you end up in a less equal position, even though the law is supposed to apply equally.

In terms of the economic disadvantage, the sexual disadvantage, and the fact that we don't have violence against women and girls taken seriously, whether in individual violence or not, despite efforts being taken by various parties and governments, the only time it seems to get attention paid to it is when it's an attempt to “responsiblize”, if I can use that term, the victims; that is, they have to learn ways to avoid being victimized.

If we took that approach in any other area, it would never be accepted. We wouldn't take that approach to property violence or to other areas. I use the example, when I'm talking to law students in my classes, that if we treated violence against women, in particular violence against indigenous women, the way we treat property violence, people would be up in arms. We would see a drastic change, because it would impact people who have greater power in terms of personal resources and influence to actually change it.

The more marginalized you are and the more unequal you are, the less likely it is you'll have your needs taken care of, and neither will you have your victimization taken seriously by the state. A woman or a girl who reports that something has happened, in a community where it has never been taken seriously, where the police have always been an intervention that harms as opposed to assists, has that legacy.

The reality is that we need more exposure of that. There's a presumption that everybody is equal and everybody has equal application and protection of the law, but I can tell you, after 30 years of doing this, there's no way that is true. If that were true, we would not have the jails full of indigenous people. We would not have the jails full of poor people. We would not have women being the fastest growing prison population in a context where we know that's not who we're at greatest risk from.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

You have 30 seconds, Ms. Bennett.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

The word you used was “responsiblize”.

[Kim Pate]

Yes. We and the Native Women's Association of Canada did a piece on the hyper-responsibilization of indigenous women and girls.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

That's about blaming, i.e., it's their own fault.

[Kim Pate]

It's putting the responsibility on them to get themselves out of a situation of being victimized and marginalized and oppressed.