Let judges be just
It’s hardly news that the court system is biased against poor people and others struggling with problems such as addiction and mental health. But when a senior judge makes that plain in no uncertain terms, people sit up and take notice.
Justice Peter Lauwers of the Ontario Court of Appeal did just that recently in the case of Keith Jaques, a Toronto man seeking to get out from under the burden of more than $10,000 in fines he incurred years ago when, by his own admission, he was in the grip of alcoholism and was “a mess.”
Now Jaques has cleaned up his life, but still finds himself struggling to pay off the fines, imposed for driving without insurance and driving with a suspended licence.
He turned to the courts for relief and found a sympathetic ear from Justice Lauwers. Still, the judge wrote, there’s nothing he can do for Jaques under the current system. It’s just too inflexible.
The judge said he accepted “without reservation” that the burden of owing the fines is “staggering” for Jaques and that he has changed his life since he was lost in an alcoholic haze back in 2007. And Jaques is hardly the first person to come to his court and effectively “beg for mercy.”
“He plainly deserves it,” wrote Justice Lauwers, “but I cannot grant it. The legislative scheme offers no way out for people who are impoverished, dealing with health issues or other difficulties, and who bear the burdens of these enormous fines for many years.
“It is most unfortunate that there is no process in the system for commuting old and back-breaking fines for people who have little prospect of paying them, and whose lives are being ruined.”
The judge had no discretion under the law in how he dealt with Jaques — no matter how he felt on a personal level. All he could do was publicly lament that his hands were tied and draw attention to an injustice.
But that doesn’t mean nothing can be done for others caught up in the justice system and struggling with personal problems.
In his ruling, Justice Lauwers suggested it may be time “to consider a quasi-bankruptcy scheme for people in Mr. Jaques’ unfortunate position.” It’s not certain how that might operate, but the principle is clear: set up a more flexible system that would allow courts to review the cases of people who have made genuine efforts to heal themselves but whose lives are crippled by old debts.
The reality is that set fines can have dramatically different impacts on different people. For some, a $10,000 penalty will be a severe but manageable burden. For others, like Jaques, getting out from under it is an impossible task. It would be fairer if fines were levied in proportion to the ability to pay, as is done in some U.S. states and such countries as Germany and France.
A spokesman for Ontario’s Ministry of the Attorney General told the Star’s Jacques Gallant that the government is “considering” Justice Lauwer’s remarks. It should take them very seriously and figure out a way to let judges do the right thing when they encounter a clear case of injustice.
Toronto man facing more than $10,000 in fines found a sympathetic ear in Ontario justice