Blood Sample Act Raises Serious Concerns

While the CBA’s National Criminal Justice Section appreciates the need to protect front-line workers from possible exposure to potentially fatal viruses – including HIV – a number of serious concerns remain about Bill C-217, the Blood Samples Act. “In our view, Bill C-217 is troubling legislation,” says Heather Perkins-McVey of Ottawa, Chair of the CBA’s National Criminal Justice Section. “While the Bill seems to address a simple problem related to health matters, it raises several troubling issues,” she explained in a letter to the Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. (See letter text at www.cba.org).

Bill C-217, a Private Member’s Bill, would allow mandatory blood sampling so that people who perform designated functions – such as firefighters and first aid workers – or those who have acted as Good Samaritans, would know whether they have been exposed to hepatitis B or C, or HIV.

First and foremost, the CBA argued that an informed medical opinion is necessary to determine whether a blood sample should be taken. “We believe that the Bill is insufficiently tailored,” said Perkins-McVey. “At a minimum, there must be objective medical grounds to believe that a person is likely to have been infected with one of the viruses before infringing the bodily integrity of another individual.”

The CBA further believes that safeguards must be in place to protect the privacy of the individual subjected to the test. “For example, in the case of a prisoner, how long after a blood sample was taken would it be before the entire prison population knew that the person had been tested for HIV?” asked Ms. Perkins-McVey.

Finally, noted the CBA, in the absence of objective medical grounds, the Bill could lead to prejudice and discrimination. “The suspicion that a person might be infected, based on appearance, socio-economic status, sexual orientation or on any underlying stereotype, is clearly inadequate.”

The CBA appeared before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights February 26, 2002. Marc David of Montreal, of the CBA’s National Criminal Justice Section, presented the Section’s views.


National Urges Proper Legal Aid Funding in BC
CBA National is urging the government of BC to properly fund legal aid and to rethink its decision to close 24 courthouses across BC.

“The BC government’s unprecedented course of action will dramatically erode the benefit and protection of the law for many BC residents, and destroy meaningful access to justice in the province, especially in civil law matters,” said Eric Rice, QC, CBA National President.

In a letter to Premier Gordon Campbell and Attorney General Geoff Plant, sent Feb. 21, CBA National called the BC government to task following announcements made in January that would see legal aid in BC cut by 40 per cent over the next three years and courthouses closed, many in northern and interior communities.

“Our members see firsthand the grievous hardship that results from inadequate legal aid,” said Mr. Rice. “British Columbia’s legal aid plan already turns away many worthy recipients, especially women and children, immigrants and low income people facing threats to housing or income security.”

The letter, based on a resolution passed unanimously by the CBA at its Mid-Winter Meeting of Council in Moncton, further urges the BC government to undertake a comprehensive review of the justice system “with a view to maintaining courthouses in local communities and determining where savings might be made to add funds to legal aid services.”

The CBA resolution also criticized the BC government for backtracking on its commitment to dedicate money raised from a tax on legal services to legal aid. “Last year alone, some $91.6 million generated by the legal services tax has ended up in general revenues, not all in legal aid as promised.”

The resolution and letter are available at www.cba.org.

These articles were published in the April 2002 issue of BarTalk. © 2002 The Canadian Bar Association. All rights reserved.