Last week, the Supreme Court of Canada released a decision which upheld key protections for sexual assault victims. The decision is R. v. J. J.
In the wake of the Me Too Revolution, Canadian parliament changed the Criminal Code to establish more protections for sexual assault victims.
Let’s say an accused has text messages, or emails, or some other form of communication directly from the complainant. Those messages may impact the dignity of the complainant. Instead of simply being used at trial in their defence, an accused must disclose these records and a pretrial must be held in order to determine what records, can, or cannot be used at trial. It’s entirely in the Judge’s hands. If the Judge determines that the records are not relevant and will hurt the complainant’s dignity, they cannot be used.
The second major change was to give the complainants the right to argue at a hearing (outside of the course of the trial) that their privacy outweighs the importance of the records. Again, it’s up to a Judge to make the final determination of the privacy rights of the complainant outweigh the rights to a defendant using all evidence at his/her disposal in order to defend the charges.
This is a very difficult balancing act. The rights, dignity and privacy of the complainant are important. A complainant should not be humiliated on the stand or hurt twice as a result of stepping forward and testifying at trial. Complainants should not be intimidated to step forward and have their voices heard. I think we can all agree with that.
At the same time, a Defendant has the right to a fair defence. If an accused cannot use all of the evidentiary tools at his/her disposal in order to combat the charges, then are we giving that Defendant a fair and meaningful opportunity to a defense a trial. Or are we just giving them a perceived fair shake while limiting the tools at their disposal?
Toronto Injury Lawyer Blog



