Canadian legal system: part 1

Date: 16-07-2025

I have been looking into how the Canadian legal system is setup to deal with crimes of sexual violence.

This eye-opening quest started when I met the author of this book recently: The story of Jane Doe : a book about rape. She became the first person in history to not only fight to get legal representaion in her own rape case but also to file a civil lawsuit against Toronto police for Charter breaches and negligence, which she successfully won after 11 years of legal battles (case summary here).

By estimate, only 5-6% of all sexual assault crimes are reported to the police, while 50% of all Canadian women have experienced at least one incident of sexual or physical assault in their lifetime (source).

What is the reason behind these disturbing statistics? Why is the Canadian justice system failing most of its citizens?

There are an insane number of problems and perspectives to look at in this topic, from child sexual abuse (it is less likely to be reported and their testimonies are more likely to be discredited by defence lawyers) to religious and ethnicity influences (Canadian native women are 4 times more likely to experience sexual assault. South Asian muslim women are many folds less likely to report such crimes) to analyzing what prison time convictions do to “fix” this issue…

I share here the 10min-presentation (first of many) I made for a non-profit I am working for right now. I narrowed down to one very particular problem that I think can have broader impact and most importantly is solvable, which is the trial setup and lack of legal representation for the victims: MALPRACTICES IN THE CANADIAN LEGAL SYSTEM AROUND SEXUAL VIOLENCE [PDF]

Do you know that if you experience sexual violence and report it to the police, in case it goes to trial (not highly likely - see presentation), you do not get any legal representation? The accused person does. If they can not afford one, one is provided for them. The case is setup as “Crown vs the accused”; an antiquated setup from centuries ago that continues to fail us to this day. You are only brought in as a witness to be questioned. You do not get to see or participate or input in the trial of your own assault in any way. You have no legal way to voice your questions, concerns, interests, needs, discomforts or expectations. If you are not trained in law (which is true for most of us), you might not even understand what the trial procedures and lawyers are doing or saying to you. You are not given any legal advice or explanations (hopefully you somehow figure out to seek legal advice and information yourself from NGOs or third parties in the community). The Crown lawyer that presents the evidence of the case has nothing to do with you. They do not represent you; they represent the state. They will not stand up for you if you are mistreated by the police or the defence lawyer in any way (see presentation above for more research articles on this).

This flawed setup naturally creates another problem: an environment where the defence attorneys for the accused person can see the trial as their time to shine. To maintain their professional reputation and “success numbers”, the trial becomes more about their chance to “win”. Nothing is really legally off the table for them, not even accessing and twisting your medical records, dating history, chats with friends on your phone or your social media posts, without your knowledge or consent. Hence, it is not surprising that questioning of the witness carries more importance in the current legal setup, even when solid medical/physical evidence or other witnesses to the crime exist. Moreover, the defence lawyers are trained to “whack” the complaintant of these crimes in law school.

Let us look at an example: let us say you report one such crime but do not want to be a part of anything to do with it anymore. you think you have done the right thing by reporting it but you dont want to relive it in any way. you just hope the bad person is caught and can not hurt anyone else. maybe you want to take time to deal with your trauma and shattering of your faith in security and civility. You give detailed accounts to the police, doctors and the social workers involved. Maybe you feel that you can not possibly discuss your experience (of such “humiliating and private” nature) in a public court setting. Now, if the case goes to trial, (you dont know if and when because the investigation and all related matters are kept private), and if you are hesitant to go to the court as the witness or seem too uncomfortable when being questioned during the trial, you can be put in jail for “obstruction”. Legally you do not have the right to refuse testifying. Your multiple testimonies given to the police, doctors and Crown lawyer are not used in court. You HAVE to be brought in and questioned…And questioned again and again and again - in case a hole can be pushed through somewhere in your account or your discomfort at reliving your assault in front of the court can be used to label you “unstable” or you can be discredited in some way by the defence lawyer. This is not a made-up example sadly but the current reality…victims being threatened, detained or even jailed by the legal system is not uncommon. Some examples:

• arrested and pushed to the point of suicide in a case with overwhelming existing evidence and other witnesses
• 16yo detained in the same cell as her rapist
• stabbed, jailed and schackled

This is just one example of the ways the current trial setup fails. How does any of this make sense to us a “civilised” society? Instead of ensuring justice, I think this setup is inherently illogical, discriminatory and unfair. This is a huge factor in why so many victims of this particular crime are hesitant to go to the police. This is also evident in the very stark difference in crime statistics for sexual violence vs physical violence.

I will continue to share my journey here as I dive deeper into this project.