Evidence of meeting #57 for Status of Women in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was system.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Katerina Frost  Government Affairs Coordinator, Canadian Centre for Gender and Sexual Diversity
Bonnie Brayton  National Executive Director, DisAbled Women's Network Canada
Nneka MacGregor  Executive Director, Women's Centre for Social Justice
Mandi Gray  Sexual Violence Coordinator, WomenatthecentrE
Jackie Stevens  Executive Director, Avalon Sexual Assault Centre
Jeremy Dias  Executive Director, Canadian Centre for Gender and Sexual Diversity
Francyne Joe  President, Native Women's Association of Canada
Tracy Porteous  Executive Director, Ending Violence Association of British Columbia
Lise Martin  Executive Director, Women's Shelters Canada
Marlihan Lopez  Liaison Officer, Regroupement québécois des Centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel
Chad Kicknosway  Senior Advisor on Justice and Human Rights, Native Women's Association of Canada

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

Thank you.

I'm sorry, that's your time.

9:50 a.m.

President, Native Women's Association of Canada

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

We're going to go now to Tracy Porteous, who's the executive director at the Ending Violence Association of British Columbia.

Go ahead, Tracy. You have five minutes.

9:50 a.m.

Tracy Porteous Executive Director, Ending Violence Association of British Columbia

Good morning. I'm speaking from the beautiful Coast Salish territory. I'm in Vancouver. I'm speaking on behalf of the Ending Violence Association of B.C., which is a provincial body that has 240 programs across the province that respond to sexual assault, domestic violence, and child abuse. I'm also speaking on behalf of the Ending Violence Association of Canada, which is the new national organization that is in place to respond to gender-based violence in practical ways, like the development of policy, training, and intervention strategies.

I want to thank the committee for having me here today and I would like to express our support of this bill, which addresses something that is at a crisis point in our country. We've never seen such a low in terms of public confidence in the justice system. When it comes to sexual assault, I think the low is at an all-time low. I think that many survivors of sexual assault don't come forward to report because of the news reports they've been hearing, but that has been the case for many years. Stats Canada suggests that only 5% of sexual assault survivors report to the police. However, we believe it's far lower.

There are some researchers out of SFU here in Vancouver who say that the number of women who report sexual assault to the police is so low it's considered statistically insignificant, yet sexual assault is far from insignificant. The results of sexual assault can have a debilitating, psychological impact that lasts an entire lifetime for survivors. I think it is incumbent upon the justice system to get it right.

We also know, from those who work with sex offenders, that for many sex offenders this is not just usually a one-time occurrence. In fact, most sex offenders, by researcher standards, have somewhere between 400 and 1,000 victims in their lifetime. So when we have one survivor in a hundred or one in a thousand who comes forward seeking a remedy from the justice system, it is incumbent upon us to get it right. Unfortunately, we are failing survivors so badly and have been for so many years.

We thank the committee and we thank the House of Commons. We thank the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this issue forward in the way that you are today. We think, specifically in terms of training for judges, that it's important that judges have training to understand the neurobiology of trauma and of fear that so many women have during a sexual assault. I think this is one of the most misunderstood aspects. Sexual assault is unlike any other crime. It's considered one of the most violent crimes a person can experience, and it's considered on par with what a soldier in a war-torn country might experience with PTSD, who has seen horrible things or whose life has been in danger.

I think we need to have police and the judicial folks understand how the trauma of sexual assault manifests in a human being, what happens in the moment of trauma, and what happens that manifests different kinds of actions on the part of survivors. We have seen too many cases where police or the judicial system has really just been misunderstood. In many respects, we are asking people who have very important jobs in our country to do those jobs blindly, without any training. With sexual assault being as complicated as it is, we also need to understand how the dynamics of sexual assault and the fear that is produced in a sexual assault can be replicated in and of itself in a courtroom. Most sexual assaults are perpetrated by males upon females. The issue is about power and control, and unless a judge, in their courtroom, is completely conscious of that, those same power dynamics can be replicated in a courtroom. They can be replicated in an interview room if somebody reports to police.

In addition to the necessary training of the judiciary, we also think the bill would be strengthened by including training for the RCMP. We understand that the aspects of the bill are written in such a way as to try to expedite its ascent, but we are only as strong as our weakest link. If we think about a house and we want to insulate the house but we have one or two windows wide open all winter long, that's the way I see our justice system. We have many police jurisdictions that are availing themselves of trauma training.

To some extent, here and there, the crown is involved. Anti-violence services and sexual assault services have definitely been availing themselves of the best training possible, but if we don't have training at the top of the food chain, if you will, at the judges' or even at the police level, we're doing an extreme disservice.

The other thing that's important to understand is—

9:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

I'm sorry. That's your time. I'm very sorry.

9:55 a.m.

Executive Director, Ending Violence Association of British Columbia

Tracy Porteous

That's okay.

9:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

We're going now to Lise Martin for five minutes. Thanks.

April 13th, 2017 / 9:55 a.m.

Lise Martin Executive Director, Women's Shelters Canada

Thank you for the invitation and the opportunity to share our thoughts on Bill C-337. Women's Shelters Canada, formerly known as the Canadian Network of Women's Shelters and Transition Houses, brings together 14 provincial and territorial shelter organizations representing over 400 shelters across Canada.

We believe that the introduction and, more importantly, the implementation of Bill C-337 is an important step in the right direction. We congratulate all MPs who are working across party lines to make this a reality. Following the numerous testimonies that you have heard over the last 18 months as members of this committee, I do not need to convince you that the systems intended to respond to violence against women are broken.

Recent court decisions in Alberta and Nova Scotia involving sexual assault and domestic violence have spurred public outrage. Clearly, Judge Lenehan and former Justice Camp demonstrated a clear disregard for and a lack of understanding of sexual assault and definitions of consent as defined in the Criminal Code.

In November 2016, Judge Deborah Paquette of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador downplayed the severity of strangulation in a domestic violence case, treated the perpetrator as the victim, categorized domestic violence as a private matter, and sentenced the RCMP officer to only 14 days' house arrest for assaulting his former girlfriend. This was in November 2016.

These recent examples, which are by no means exceptions, demonstrate how Canadian courts are failing to send the message that sexual assault and all forms of violence against women are unacceptable. For decades, advocates in the violence against women sector, and survivors, have fought to make domestic violence and sexual assault a visible and socially significant issue. Despite this, we continue to see our work undermined by Canadian judges, who label domestic violence as a private matter and misunderstand the basic ideas and laws about consent and sexual assault.

Enacting Bill C-337 to ensure training for judges working on cases of sexual assault is a demonstration of the Government of Canada's commitment to ensure that our legal system believes survivors. Training, however, must go beyond federal judges. Police, lawyers, crown prosectors, and judges all need training on sexual assault and domestic violence. For victims of sexual assault, police officers are their first interaction with the justice system. Since fear is the main barrier to victims' reporting sexual assault and domestic violence, we need systems that support victims and do not cause them further harm.

Our understanding of the proposed bill is that it only covers federally mandated judges. This is an example of why we need a national action plan on violence against women. A national plan could cover judges mandated by the provinces and territories and begin to ensure that women in all areas of the country have access to comparable levels of services and protection. This is not the case today. This is an area where federal leadership is called for.

In conclusion, mandatory and ongoing education that includes the neurobiological impacts of trauma, the power and control dynamics of violence against women, the role of intersectionality, and the experiences of survivors, with input and participation of women's organizations, would go a long way.

At Women's Shelters Canada, we would like to see training for judges broadened to include not only training on sexual assault but also training on domestic violence and the gendered nature of violence against women; training to better understand colonization and intergenerational trauma, with a focus on their impact upon Canada's indigenous peoples; training for the judicial committees that oversee the appointment of judges; collaboration with women's organizations in developing training, including trauma-informed approaches; and finally, training that is shaped by the perspective of survivors, as they are indeed the true experts.

That concludes my presentation.

10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

Thank you.

Ms. Lopez, you have five minutes.

10 a.m.

Marlihan Lopez Liaison Officer, Regroupement québécois des Centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak this morning about this very important issue.

According to our organization's surveys, many women who choose to file a complaint consider that the justice system's method of handling sexual assault cases is flawed, unfair and fraught with myths and prejudices. Therefore, we think judges and future judges must receive training with regard to sexual assault to counter the stereotypes and prejudices in the legal process and decisions, and to better understand the systemic barriers to fair access to justice.

The Regroupement québécois des Centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel, or CALACS, emphasized that the judges' training should result in better knowledge of the sexual assault issue and the intersecting contexts of vulnerability, such as addiction, isolation, lack of information, view of the perpetrator toward certain marginalized groups and various forms of violence that may be combined with sexual assault.

The judges' training should make them aware of the various myths and prejudices in our society and institutions, and of how other systems of oppression, such as racism, sexism, disablism and other types of discrimination toward members of the LGTBQ community, contribute to myths and prejudices when it comes to sexual assault.

The training should result in the acknowledgement that there are systemic barriers to access to the legal system that make certain victims particularly vulnerable to discrimination as part of the legal process and that there are barriers to fair access to justice.

The training should first address the definition of sexual assault, and the development of this definition to include other forms of sexual violence and to correspond to our modern reality.

The training should address links with other forms of violence, such as racism, homophobia, transphobia and disablism, which can intersect with sexual assault.

The myths and prejudices must be addressed to analyze how some groups are more stigmatized as a result of their ethnicity, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation, gender identity, migratory status, and so on.

The consequences and discriminatory nature of sexual assault with regard to the victims and their needs and rights must be addressed. Certain consequences may be experienced by all victims, while other consequences are experienced only by some more marginalized groups.

For example, victims with a precarious migratory status may jeopardize their right to remain in the country if they report their attacker. In other cases, sexual assault may be associated with a hate crime if the victims were targeted as a result of their sexual or gender identity. Also, victims with disabilities may be denied services if the perpetrator is a guardian or health care provider.

Judges must be made aware of these realities so they can properly understand the complexity of the consequences faced by victims of sexual assault.

The training must first address the particular needs of victims—especially women—who have specific and multiple vulnerabilities, to ensure fair access to justice.

These needs include the implementation of universal accommodation measures in the justice system and access to certain methods, such as the option of testifying outside the courtroom behind a screen and testifying in camera, to make it easier for victims to testify. The specific realities of immigrant women, refugee or non-status women and women with disabilities must be taken into account.

The training should address the behaviours to avoid in order not to further victimize the victims and act in a discriminatory manner. The handling of certain sexual assault cases is biased by racial, sexual, gender, class and other prejudices.

In the Quebec legal system, for example, in some identified and documented cases, culture and racial or ethnic identity were problematized and used as mitigating factors in the court decisions.

In R. v. Lucien, the ethnic origin and race of the perpetrators and the victim seem to have been used as mitigating factors.

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

Sorry, Ms. Lopez, but your time is up.

Now we'll go to Ms. Ludwig for seven minutes for some questions.

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Karen Ludwig Liberal New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Thank you.

Thank you very much for all your testimony and for helping us become more informed on this issue.

The spirit of the bill before us is an important one that we definitely want to get right. We've heard from a variety of witnesses today and at our last session on the scope of the bill, and some areas where it may need to be broadened. As the bill stands right now, in terms of instilling public confidence and faith in the system, if mandatory training on sexual assault was there as put forward, I'm wondering if it would instill faith in the system, or maybe even a blind faith in the system.

I want to open this up to your experiences and opportunities on this because we've heard from testimony, for example, looking at the crime funnel. A sexual assault takes place. Most victims are fearful of reporting. Then they go before the police. This bill does not take in that element. Then, in the court system itself, many cases are pleaded out. In those that go to court, we've heard testimony about the concerns around the lack of training and awareness in the system by crown prosecutors, as well as the defence attorneys. At that point there could still be another plea. Then we're looking at juries and we're looking at judges.

If we limit the scope of this bill as it stands right now, to just training judges, is that going to give enough faith in the system? Are people going to be assuming that the whole system received mandatory training?

10:10 a.m.

Executive Director, Women's Shelters Canada

Lise Martin

My sense is that those in the legal system might think it's sufficient, but definitely those affected first-hand will not, as will the organizations and the advocates that work directly with survivors of sexual assault and violence against women generally.

10:10 a.m.

Executive Director, Ending Violence Association of British Columbia

Tracy Porteous

I think that one way to make this particular bill stronger is to make sure that it not only mandatorily trains new judges coming onto the bench but mandatorily trains all federal judges. I think the wording right now is that it's new judges, and it should be all judges.

I also think that we shouldn't limit ourselves to creating reforms just in relation to judges' training. If including training for police doesn't work for this bill, then let's have another bill ensuring that training for RCMP is done.

I also think that many legal minds are contemplating changes to the Criminal Code. Right now the way the Criminal Code is worded is that there's a requirement on the crown to prove that consent did not take place. It's very hard to prove that something didn't take place. I was at a conference recently where a number of legal minds were saying that perhaps we need to change or codify the rules in the Criminal Code around consent so that it's up to the defence to prove that consent was there. It's almost a reverse onus.

I think we should be thinking about a number of things. We should be thinking about provincial court judges. I know that's not your jurisdiction. In the 1980s a letter was sent by the federal attorney general to all the attorneys general in the country asking them to do more about spousal assault because women were being beaten by their husbands in their homes, and it's another form of silent violence that's going on across the country. After that happened, every attorney general in every province and territory in the country developed policies and programs and responses in relation to spousal assault.

Of course, we're not there yet, but I think that those of you who are at Canada's House in Ottawa shouldn't underestimate the power you have in influencing your provincial and territorial counterparts. I think when we all work together, we'll likely be more able to advance. Don't think about this particular bill as the only thing that's needed. I think we need to be working on a lot of fronts.

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

Karen Ludwig Liberal New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Thank you very much. Let me add to this as well.

We've heard this from a variety of witnesses, that it's not a one-stop shop involving the mandatory training. Also, my point in asking the question is that unless we start working on the aspect of the crime funnel, mandatory judge training.... The judge could be the best-trained judge out there, but unless the system itself has some correction factor, he or she as a judge before the court or on the bench only has the evidence before him or her upon which to base the judgment. They may be the best informed on sexual assault, but from what we've heard from the last 18 months of testimony looking at violence against women and young girls, we need to have a comprehensive approach to dealing with and supporting those who are survivors of sexual assault.

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

I think Chad had a comment. I don't know whether you're interested to hear it.

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

Karen Ludwig Liberal New Brunswick Southwest, NB

I am, and any other comments on this.

Thank you.

10:10 a.m.

Chad Kicknosway Senior Advisor on Justice and Human Rights, Native Women's Association of Canada

I just want to add that the current Judges Act in section 62 grants the council powers to establish ongoing seminars for existing judiciary. My concern here is that this bill only impacts newly appointed judges. I would suggest incorporating into the current Bill C-337 some sort of transitional provision or some other provision that compels the council to make it a priority that all judges, even the old ones, take the mandatory comprehensive education on sexual assault.

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

Karen Ludwig Liberal New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Thank you for raising that. When Justice Kent and Mr. Sabourin were in, they were talking about the training itself. If it's just training for new judges, they may not see another sexual assault case for five or six years, and it would be outdated or they might not remember—or they might never see a sexual assault case. One recommendation we have heard is that there be ongoing training within the judicial system and in other areas.

I'm just going to pass my time over, unless you want to say something, Francyne.

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

You're out of time, I think.

10:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

Karen Ludwig Liberal New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Thank you.

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

All right.

Then we'll go to Ms. Harder for seven minutes.

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Thank you very much.

One thing the National Judicial Institute said is how important it is to consult with wider society when forming the training that goes out to judges or that they participate in. They said that they want to do it or are doing it.

When Ms. Ambrose was consulted on this bill or brought in as a witness, she also said that she hoped the Liberal government would put this as a priority and that funding would be put toward consulting groups such as yours in order to make sure that the training was spoken to by, I would say, the experts or those who are on the ground working with these individuals day in and day out, which of course is very important for this training to be as effective as possible.

That said, I would be curious to know whether any of you have been consulted with regard to the new judges training.

We'll start with Lise.

10:15 a.m.

Executive Director, Women's Shelters Canada

Lise Martin

No. I haven't been. I think on this issue it's a question of bringing together the theory and the practice. I don't think it's one or the other. It's really needing to bring them together to see how they work or don't work. That needs to be incorporated into the training.