Public Safety committee  I think it depends very much on what you mean by segregation. I'm not sure that we have the kind of reform or the kind of legislation that we need to justify any kind of isolation. Even the most difficult of people—people who have decompensated—can still have contact with somebod

Public Safety committee  If there's an emergency situation, such as a riot, and you need containment on an urgent basis, then I think that the people who are on hand need to be able to do that. That is not a power that should be open to abuse, overuse or misuse. When we say “for the shortest possible dur

Public Safety committee  Yes, but that doesn't have to translate into isolation, nor does it mean that there can't be judicial oversight within a very short period of time.

Public Safety committee  No, I'm not sure that's what I said, Mr. Eglinski. What I was saying was actually in agreement with you. In an emergency situation, there has to be somebody on hand who can take care of the situation. That doesn't have to translate into isolation, and there should be external,

Public Safety committee  It's very hard to provide an answer in the abstract. In Ontario, Associate Chief Justice Marrocco talked about the five-day review and said that there needs to be external oversight at that point. I think it may be very possible, if you're going to be reviewing the placement in s

Public Safety committee  If by “conditions” you mean making sure that people get a few hours out of cell, including a couple of hours of human contact, and that this would be the only form of oversight in addition to the patient advocate and mental health advocate, that would certainly not be sufficient

Public Safety committee  The government did not appeal the decision that ruled it unconstitutional because of the lack of independent review, so that decision stands. Our organization appealed all the grounds for which the court did not find it unconstitutional, so that part is continuing. To answer you

Public Safety committee  I'll start with the first one. “Least restrictive” is a constitutional standard. It's just impermissible under Canadian constitutional law to hold people in restrictive circumstances and in a restrictive status that is not necessary and that is not the least restrictive. I th

Public Safety committee  Over and above areas designated as SIU, as I mentioned in my remarks, in any situation in which a person is held in extreme isolation—whether it's maximum security, medical observation, a disability, or whatever the reason is—that isolation is causing the harms to human beings th

Public Safety committee  If I may jump in on that, you'll have submissions on that, both from Aboriginal Legal Services and from the Native Women's Association of Canada, and our organization endorses their positions.

Public Safety committee  All I want to add.... There isn't a lot to add to that, but I think we need to understand that the way our corrections system works is not the only way it has to work, and that's why my colleague and I keep talking about a need for deep-seated reform. We look at some of the measu

Public Safety committee  Absolutely. I think that's part of how the U.K. has been able to all but eliminate these exceptional and difficult circumstances. Then they don't have to isolate those 60 people.

Public Safety committee  I'll be going first. Cara will come in a little bit later. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members. When we raise concerns about solitary confinement, this is not an abstract discussion. We are expressing concern about the harms caused to human beings by the practice of extreme i

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Now you have the whole thing.