Printer friendly

"Lawyers collecting horror stories to sue governments for legal aid cuts" is the headline of Southam News story, written by legal reporter Janice Tibbetts, in which the CBA is quoted extensively. The article, which ran across the country Jan. 10-12, focuses on the CBA's efforts to improve access to justice for those who can't afford it.

The CBA has been championing legal aid for many years on many fronts - including lobbying of provincial, territorial and federal governments. Last August, the CBA undertook a new initiative - to find legal aid test cases to broaden the right to legal representation. At the moment, the CBA is watching closely for an announcement in February's federal budget.

In her article, Ms. Tibbetts explains the CBA's position. Here is what the article said:

"Lawyers collecting 'horror stories' to sue governments for legal aid cuts"
Southam News
Friday, January 10, 2003
Janice Tibbetts


"OTTAWA - Canada's lawyers are busily sifting through legal aid "horror stories" across the country in their search for winnable test cases they can use to sue governments for massive cuts to the program.

"Access to justice for the poor is what we want," said Daphne Dumont, a legal aid expert with the Canadian Bar Association.

The landmark challenge will be fought in the area of family law, because governments' refusal to provide legal aid in such cases as child custody disputes is one of the most egregious infringements of the right to justice, says Dumont, a Prince Edward Island lawyer who heads the bar association's legal aid committee.

The 37,000-member association, fed up with unsuccessful lobbying, announced last summer that it will haul governments before the courts in hopes of establishing a constitutional requirement to properly fund legal aid.

A committee of constitutional experts is currently vetting cases countrywide to find the worst cases of people who have been turned down for legal help.

"You don't want to pick ones that you're going to lose," said Dumont. "We're bound to start with a family law one. We want to do ones that have the most beneficial, precedent-setting effect." The bar association, by sponsoring the fight for people who cannot afford to launch their own challenges, will argue that denying legal aid violates the constitutional right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right to fundamental justice.

The only foothold for mandatory legal aid that has been established in the courts is a 1999 Supreme Court of Canada decision that a New Brunswick mother had the right to public funding to defend herself against the state seizing her children.

The bar association, which has posted a "legal aid watch" on its Web site, already has documented several "horror stories" of people who have been turned down for funding. They include:
- Richard, a divorced B.C. father, who makes $13,000 a year working in a garage, earns too much to qualify for legal aid. As a result, he cannot afford to go to court to fight for access to his son because the province's legal aid plan only covers his wife.
- Clara, a senior citizen who moved to the Yukon to escape a "lifelong nightmare" of an abusive husband, was unable to obtain a divorce because the territory's legal aid plan doesn't cover divorces and matrimonial property disputes.
- Dean, a Nova Scotia university student who was charged with marijuana cultivation just because he was attending a party at a house when police raided it, didn't qualify for legal aid help in the province to go to court because of the nature of the crime he allegedly committed.

Federal Justice Minister Martin Cauchon has acknowledged that the legal aid program is in crisis.
Manitoba became the latest province to add to the problem by announcing sudden cuts to its system earlier this week, including an end to free legal help in civil cases and reductions in criminal legal aid, in which people seek help to defend themselves against criminal charges.
Last year, the B.C. government announced even more dramatic cuts.

All provinces have complained of federal funding reductions that have cut as much as 30 per cent from the strained system over the last decade and produced a patchwork of services across the country.

A federal review of the troubled program has dragged on for more than two years.
Suzanne Thebarge, a spokeswoman for Cauchon, said that the minister is working on a plan to allocate legal aid funding "in a fair and equitable manner."

Cauchon has hinted at a funding announcement in the federal budget, expected next month. The federal government currently gives provinces direct funding to cover legal aid for people charged with criminal offences, but it is up to individual provinces to decide how much of their social funding from Ottawa, under the Canada Health and Social Transfer, is spent on civil legal aid.

Through the CHST, Ottawa transfers lump-sum amounts to the provinces for health, education, welfare and legal aid and the governments decide how they will spend the money. Legal aid spending is the bottom priority for most provinces, said Dumont. "