Perceptions of the Justice System

Few positive perceptions

One of the last questions we asked participants in the interview was “How would you characterize your perception of the Canadian justice system?” Of the 33 participants who chose to respond to that question, only four assessed the justice system positively. The most positive statement came from an Eastern Canada participant, who asserted:

I think my perception overall is still positive. I think we live in a country that champions equal rights for everyone… I still maintain that positive outlook because I’ve met a lot of people who are supportive and who champion that equal rights view as well and I think as the years go on we’re moving more towards that acceptance more and more (EC#11).

This reflects an experience in which the individual felt supported by the justice system, and in which they were fortunate to engage with progressive legal actors. Another participant acknowledges the privilege that allows some people to have the sorts of positive outcomes they hope for:

I have respect (for the system). I ran a very successful office, but I also had a human resources department in Toronto that I could pick up the phone, a legal department that I could pick up the phone, and I realized that I never ran the business on my own. I had backup. And I’m thankful for the lawyers and the human resources (CC#19).

Ambivalence

One participant’s perspective on Canadian legal processes was more ambivalent:

From a personal perspective I feel like I’m not – like I feel quite protected by the justice system personally and from a place of relative privilege. But from a general global Canadian citizen’s perspective, I feel like I guess mediocre to somewhere in the middle about our justice system. I certainly have concerns (EC#10).

This participant recognized that their own success was not something guaranteed for all, that their whiteness and their social class advantaged them over other less privileged 2SLGBTQI+ people. Half a dozen participants took a similarly equivocal stance on the system as a whole, acknowledging that it had some assets, but also barriers that limited their outcomes. For two participants, this had to do with the discrepancy between the laws on the books and the law in practice:

I think at the high, high level there’s some sort of protection for LGBTQ individuals, but I think implementing it at a more municipal, community level there’s not a lot of structure or information that’s given out so it’s kind of hard to pursue something (EC#11).

I think that the Canadian Justice System, when it has the opportunity to do its job, does it well. I mean I think that we’ve had a lot of pretty solid decisions from the courts on LGBT issues but I think the justice system fails us in terms of access to justice and it fails us in terms of the damage awards and the penalties (CC#2).

For others, their ambivalence was grounded in seeing and experiencing both satisfactory and unsatisfactory outcomes:

Well it was mixed because the first one, I guess the first time there was no help at all…. The second one, the first advisor was not helpful at all. The second advisor was opposite, 100 percent reversal. So I guess it depends who you get (CC#21).

It didn’t really impact my perception because even beforehand I had a very open minded perception of it because in some ways it had helped my family and in other ways it had screwed it over (EC#7).

One participant dealing with a sexual assault case shared their view that, while they appreciated some elements of their experience, they were less pleased with others. On the one hand, they felt like everyone involved seemed to believe their account of the attack. But, on the other hand, they continued, "I don’t understand it to this day – that they could tell me not to speak about my story, even when I was able to give them an educated perspective about why, around my safety, that it was important for me to be able to tell” (CC#6).

A “broken” system

Unfortunately, negative, highly critical responses far outnumbered the positive and ambivalent responses. Among the most negative sentiments were comments like the following:

The system is totally broken. It’s so gender-biased. It’s very unfair. It’s draining financially and emotionally (CC#5).

It has no humanity. It’s lost its humanity. It has no humanity (CC#12).

It’s literally toxic from the foundation up. I honestly don’t feel like I have any faith in the Canadian justice system (EC#2).

Across both regions, there was a widespread sense that Canadian legal systems were “broken” and not to be trusted. Even those who might once have held more positive attitudes had lost their trust in it because of their own and their community’s experiences. Their perceptions were “tarnished,” as one participant put it (EC#7). Speaking specifically about police, one participant described their shift in attitude:

For me the police were like the hero to protect if I was having a bad day, if I was having some homophobic, racist attack…. But after some experience with the police and some people who share with me their experience, I just stopped believing in the justice system and it’s really oppressive for minorities (CC#17).

For others, the suspicion and distrust were longer lived:

I think it made me think a lot more about – so I knew coming into it that I felt pretty uncomfortable with police. I knew that my community were disproportionally struggling. I saw that among my friends and amongst the people that I found in the work that I did (CC#4).

For at least eight of the participants, their dissatisfaction was shaped by the failure they perceived of the system to recognize their sexual orientation and/or gender identity. They felt invisible, concerned that “the whole system has not been designed for survivors, for queer people, for trans people… it’s just not” (CC#1). Another was also very explicit in stating “The justice system really failed me… And that’s how I feel, to this day, that I’m invisible” (CC#9).

Similarly, another participant felt like, “Oh I just thought I don’t exist. Like people of my identity don’t exist to them. And if we do, it’s our fault” (CC#20). These participants felt that the justice system and its players lacked the capacity to comprehend the particular ways in which 2SLGBTQI+ people engage with the system, and the particular needs they may have in seeking “justice.”

Access to justice

Another barrier to participants’ inability to obtain satisfactory outcomes was accessibility – which has been noted elsewhere in this report. Here, too, we see the intersectional effects of sexual orientation and class, with the key concerns being the financial barriers to pursuing legal remedies, although those who were thought least likely to overcome these barriers varied. One participant thought it was middle-income earners who were caught in a Catch-22 situation:

There’s tons of supports for the rich because they can afford it. There’s tons of access to justice for low-income people, folks, family. There’s legal clinics all over the place. But what about those just above the financial eligibility threshold? …There’s a huge gap in access to justice (CC#12).

However, most felt that it was those in the lower-income brackets who struggled most with affordability. For example:

I think it’s an issue of access. Hugely an issue of access… I just kind of figured that if you couldn’t afford a lawyer you could get legal aid. Nope… If you’re embroiled in civil dispute, whether they’re custody and child support issues, whether it’s dealing with emergency protection orders, whether it’s dealing with wills and trusts (EC#3).

It was not simply legal representation that participants found challenging to access. Some also lamented what they saw as the lack of additional supports, especially for victims of crime:

And there’s no real – even victim services, they don’t really help. Like they’ll talk to you for a minute and then it’s like, okay, thanks, bye (CC#9).

I almost jumped that day. Like if the friend hadn’t met me right there, like come over and showed up. I wouldn’t be here. They don’t care how trauma impacts survivors. It’s very much well we’re following the law, who did it. It’s not holistic. It’s not healing. It’s not even about community (CC#1).