Must face abusers in court
In his letter to the attorney general, Hogan asked for the “reverse onus” provision on bail to be extended to an accused with prior charges of intimate partner violence (IPV) or domestic violence, and not just to those who’ve previously been found guilty of it, as is the current law.
He also asked that IPV and domestic violence be added to the list of reasons an accused can be denied bail.
“I feel we need to move quickly to prevent further victimization of some of the most vulnerable people in our society,” Hogan wrote.
‘MORE MUST BE DONE’
On Wednesday, May 9, Hogan received a response.
“I share your sentiment that more must be done to protect victims of IPV until genderbased violence has been eradicated,” Virani wrote, agreeing with Hogan’s description of an epidemic.
In his four-page reply, Virani indicated he had forwarded Hogan’s suggestions to officials in his department, and outlined efforts the federal government has made related to IPV.
Among them: Bill C-233, which requires bail courts to consider whether an accused charged with IPV should wear an electronic monitoring device as a release condition when requested by the Crown.
Also, wrote Virani, an amendment to legislation adding IPV to the list of educational seminar topics the Canadian Judicial Council may establish for judges.
NOT REGULARLY SEEN IN N.L.
Those two changes may technically be in force, but they’re not regularly seen in Newfoundland and Labrador, say advocates.
Electronic monitoring would work in a way that emergency protection orders (EPO) do not, say some – including former provincial justice minister Andrew Parsons when he spoke with reporters following a 2019 announcement that the province was bringing back an electronic monitoring program.
“It’ll actually help when we talk about breaches of no contact (orders). Basically, we have an evidence system now that will make that easier,” he said of the Gps-based monitoring systems.
Local advocates working with IPV survivors tell Saltwire they aren’t aware of many, if any, instances where electronic monitoring has been implemented in an IPV situation, and EPOS remain a problem of their own.
“Every single victim seems to have a problem with EPOS,” says Olivia Lynch, interim executive director of Violence Prevention Avalon East.
‘YOU DEFEND YOURSELF AS A VICTIM’
issunewdith Another the emergency orders – which are essentially just pieces of paper, she notes – is they require the complainant to face the abuser in court, unless that person agrees to sign it.
“You defend yourself as a victim. There’s no duty counsel to cross-examine your abuser,” adds Elyse Mcgrath, chair of the organization’s board of directors.
“You’re basically in front of a judge, asking for the order to be granted, and that’s retraumatization. It’s always dangerous because you don’t know what they will do next.
“I would totally agree that it’s really just a piece of paper. And what’s the victim going to do? Hold the piece of paper? There’s no deterrence.”
DO JUDGES UNDERSTAND THE IMPACTS OF IPV?
While some judges seem to understand the impacts of IPV on those who experience it, others do not, Lynch and Mcgrath say. Consistent training for the judiciary can’t be optional; it should be mandatory.
“I think right now, it depends on how long (the judge) has dealt with IPV,” Mcgrath says.
“I’ve seen judges touch on the importance of a victim impact statement, which I think is great. I’ve seen judges look victims in the eye when they give a decision or sentencing, and it makes such a difference when that person leaves court. They feel like they were heard.
“Even if they didn’t get the results they intended, they know that they were acknowledged as a victim in this situation, and I think it’s very important to the healing process. And I’ve also seen judges totally disregard the victim in this situation.”
GROWING ISSUE
Statistics Canada indicated there were 117,093 victims of police-reported IPV in the country in 2022; an increase of 19 per cent since 2014.
The rate of IPV – which often goes unreported to police – was more than three times higher among women and girls, and was especially high among those aged between 12 and 24 years.
Physical assault was the most common form of IPV in 2022, followed by sexual assault, uttering threats and criminal harassment.
In Canada, there were 6,920 victims of solved homicide between 2009 and 2022. Nearly one-fifth of them were killed by an intimate partner.
UNDERSTAND THE DANGERS
At the very least, the courts need to understand the potential dangers of releasing a person accused of IPV on bail, Lynch says.
“The fact is, when somebody leaves (an IPV situation), they’re more at danger,” she says.
“When they report, they’re more in danger. These are dangerous things that judges should understand when they’re deciding on bail.”
This is the third part in our series looking into intimate partner violence. Next week, read: A ‘system overhaul’ and understanding the risk factors for IPV homicide.