A person worried about getting beaten up at home shouldn鈥檛 have to worry about getting beaten up in court. Women applying to sa国际传媒 Supreme Court for protection from a family member must pay up to $200 in advance.
Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, sa国际传媒鈥檚 representative for children and youth, says sa国际传媒 is the only province to require that women who fear violence from a family member pay an application fee to get a court date. She called the fee 鈥渃allous鈥� and is urging Attorney General Suzanne Anton to scrap it.
Under sa国际传媒鈥檚 Family Law Act, which came into effect in March 2013, the definition of family violence was broadened and a new type of protection order, formerly called a restraining order, was created. The legislation made it a criminal offence to breach such an order by contacting or harassing a victim.
About 75 per cent of protection orders are obtained through provincial court, which charges no fee. But women involved in matters such as child support, divorce or division of property before the Supreme Court must pay in advance if they are also seeking a protection order. The fee is $80 for someone who has started a case; $200 for those who haven鈥檛.
The Ministry of Justice points out that a filing fee is standard procedure in applying for similar services, and that those who can鈥檛 afford it can apply to have the fee waived.
So someone who is in the midst of court procedures that are already draining, financially and emotionally, must endure more bureaucracy and humiliation to prove she or he can鈥檛 pay the fee. The system that should be helping a person through a difficult times is adding to the burden.
As Turpel-Lafond says: 鈥淛ustice must be accessible to victims at no cost.鈥�
When a protection order is granted, it must then be delivered to the person from whom protection is sought. Depending on circumstances, the court can direct police officers or sheriffs to deliver the orders, which doesn鈥檛 cost the applicant.
But in other cases, the applicant must arrange for the protection order to be delivered, usually by commissionaires, and must pay the cost.
No slight intended toward commissionaires, who perform many useful and important functions, but sworn law-enforcement officers in the public employ are the ones who should be the ones handling those orders.
We should not take steps, even tiny ones, back to those times before modern police services evolved when police protection was available mainly to the moneyed classes.
Some fees are justified for certain government services where the user-pay concept is appropriate. And it鈥檚 not out of line for courts to charge filing fees in matters such as business disputes and debt-collection, but it鈥檚 wrong to charge a fee to someone who fears for her safety or the safety of her children.
Turpel-Lafond said about 100 protection orders are issued each month, and says that number is too low. She said women are forced to consider finances when making decisions about their safety.
The protection-order fee is one that hinders access to the justice system when the well-being of children, among others, is at stake.
Ditch the fee. People looking to the justice system for protection shouldn鈥檛 have to pay for that protection.
