The inability to access Canada’s legal system

 The inability to access Canada’s legal system

Although the rule of law assumes human equality and equal accessibility of justice to all citizens in Canada, the government does not achieve the uniformity for the many middle and low-income Canadians. Canada’s justice system faces several complex issues that affect the country’s ability to deliver compassionate, fair, and just results to its citizens. The Justice system in Canada gives preferential treatment to the upper-class individuals and is too harsh to the low and middle-income citizens. It is difficult for the poor and middle-income people of Canada to navigate and access the country’s legal system.  The inability to access Canada’s legal system is due to; inadequate financial resources, lack of legal awareness on the accessibility of justice system, long distances that they travel to access a licensed service provider, and long trial period.

Canada’s legal jurisprudence composes of power discrimination and an imbalance of the haves and have not. It is an overwhelming and challenging experience for many low and middle-income Canadians who come into contact with the Canadian justice system. The evolution of the Canadian Charter helps in distinguishing the approach of Canada to justice from other countries such as the United States. It is, therefore, essential to understand that equality and fairness to judgment as a collective endeavor for which all individuals are responsible, but not just an individual rights elevation.

Despite the message of the Canadian Charter that makes the citizens feel they have achieved equal justice, the Canadian justice system is a pool of privilege, discrimination, and inequality. A small number of individuals who are rich command enormous power in the justice system at the expense of the middle and lower-income Canadians. In Canada, accessibility of the legal system and knowledge belong to the club of the privileged in the society.  

One of the failures of an advanced justice system like that of Canada is not providing access to legal justice to its citizens whom it serves. Although the accessibility of the justice system is a human right, many Canadians who have middle and low income, find themselves unable to access the Canadian justice system because of inadequate finance and poverty. As a result, many Canadian men and women of low and middle income become their lawyers. According to to…. in 2017, 61 percent of small and middle-income litigants did not have counsel to represent them. The low and middle class are not able to pay the required average legal fee of $ 338 per hour. Such a legitimate price leaves the low and middle class with limited options.

To date, litigants who do not have a counsel representation fill the Canadian courtrooms. Research has shown that people achieve justice in courts when they have legal representation. Therefore, low and middle-income litigants who do not have legal representation have a likelihood of not getting fair legal justice. Unrepresented litigants rarely know how to present their case in courts, and therefore, presenting facts before the court becomes an insurmountable hurdle. Some low and middle-income people try to navigate the complex demands of Canada’s justice system law and procedure. Others give up, and therefore, they are unable to access their justice.

The Canadian justice system is said to belong to two groups; corporations and the wealthy on the one hand, and the middle and low-income earners. The wealthy and corporations have all the accessibility to justice and courts because they are deep-pocketed and able to afford counsel and judgment. Besides, the wealthy can navigate the justice system because they can hire counsel. Therefore, the wealthy stand high chances of winning their cases and buying justice. Inadequate financial resources and poverty hinder the low and middle-income people in Canada from accessing their legal system. Canada’s justice system is more concerned with the wealthy class.

In Canada, there is growing evidence that the majority of the low and middle-income people cannot afford to solve their legal problems through the country’s established formal court processes. The high cost of accessing justice and legal services such as lawyer fees is high. Although the low and medium-income earners do have some income, few assets, and at times, a modest home, they are ineligible for legal aid.

The low and medium-income class in Canada may be unwilling to gamble with their children’s education money, put a mortgage on their house, or use their retirement savings to pursue justice in Canada’s courts. Therefore, their justice accessibility options become grim. As a result, they end up becoming their lawyers, utilize their family assets in the litigation process, or give up the justice system. The results may be unjust; for example, a low or middle-income earner injured due to a wrongful act of another wealthy person may end up deciding not to pursue any compensation due to the high costs of the justice system.

In Canada, thousands of middle and low income citizens are routinely imprisoned because of their inability to pay fines. Also, due to their failure to pay legal representations for offenses that are minor, they are put in criminal records that deny them life opportunities such as jobs. Therefore, low and middle-income Canadians get condemned to lifetime poverty. For the same criminal offense, the small and middle-income Canadians are more likely to be charged, arrested, sentenced, convicted, or given a longer prison days than their upper-class counterparts. The criminal population image portrayed in Canada’s national prisons and jails is an image of a distorted justice system.

There are increased lengthy proceedings in the Canadian courts that end up increasing the cost of justice. The length court proceedings end up swallowing the litigant’s home equity or his/her bank account. Therefore, such a challenge leads to less public confidence in Canada’s justice system that shuts some people out of the system, and accessibility of justice becomes impossible.

There is the challenge of long trials in the Canadian justice system that phases out the low and middle-income citizens. For both criminal and civil litigation, long tests are becoming common. The length of civil trials varies from one court to another; for example, in 1996, the average period in 1996, that a trail took in the Vancouver Law courts, was 12.9 hours. To date, in the same court, the average trial period had doubled to 25.7 hours. Some trials go on for years. The extended tests come with a cost. Also, the trail may take place in courts that are a far distance from the litigant’s place of residence. Therefore, transport and accommodation becomes a challenge. The long trial period, transportation, and housing make those Canadian citizens with middle and low income to give up. As a result, the legal system becomes unjust to the small and middle-income earners.

In the United Kingdom, the rule of law forms the country’s basis of the nation’s just and order. Without the rule of law, citizens do not develop trust in the government’s institutions. The maintenance of the United Kingdom’s rule of law depends on the citizen’s ability to have essential accessibility to the justice system. If some citizens, such as the low and middle-income people, cannot access equal justice as their wealthy counterparts, then, the law suffers everywhere in the country.

In the United Kingdom, middle and low-income people face legal problems that demand the right support and advice. Without such help and information, the consequences that the middle and low-income people of the United Kingdom face are profound, such as falling into debt, being homeless, and separation from their children. Such consequences have a substantial human cost to the individuals as well as their families. Therefore, the United Kingdom justice system is a two-tier system, one that is open to the wealthy individuals and ones who can afford the system, and the other one for the vulnerable low and middle-income citizens who need the legal system protection.

In the United Kingdom, the accessibility of justice is the provision of legal aid that acts as a cornerstone to a stable structural integrity. Without the middle and low-income people accessing and timely legal advice, they cannot effectively enforce and claim their rights.

The Justice System in the United Kingdom is unaffordable to most low and middle-income people. Most of the middle and low-income people of the United Kingdom are denied access to justice because of their inability to pay for legal aid. Legal advice centers have closed down, fees for tribunals and courts keep on rising. In the United Kingdom, most middle and low-income people are face with cases that involve medical negligence, immigration, debt, welfare, family, and housing. Such cases are not eligible for legal aid.

Consequently, most of the low and middle-income people are not eligible for legal aid. Therefore, there is no dispute that in the United Kingdom, fewer people access free representation and legal help in their cases. The legal aid cut in the United Kingdom has led to a failure to obtain an early specialist legal advice.

The government has not effected exceptional case funding (ECF) meant to act as a safety for those low and middle-income citizens in need of legal aid. With the failing of the government’s legal aid security, it leaves people with middle and low income without any option rather than giving up in their search for justice. On the other hand, the upper-class of the United Kingdom citizens do not depend on the government’s ECF in their search for truth. The upper-class people of the United Kingdom can access and navigate any process of the county’s legal justice because they have the financial resources.

The United Kingdom’s justice system bureaucracy is time-consuming and costly. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) bureaucracy is excessive. It ends up affecting the accessibility of justice to the middle and low-income people of the United Kingdom. The LAA is complicated, time-consuming, and costly. The complexity of the United Kingdom justice system affects the legal system efficiency, favoring the wealthy and upper-class people of the society at the expense of middle and low-income people. Besides, in the United Kingdom, a common law country, the tribunal and high court fees prevent the middle and low-income people from seeking their legal claims. The fees charged by the United Kingdom’s court and tribunal are very high and beyond the means of the middle and low-class litigants. With such high costs, the upper-class people are the only ones left with the opportunity of pursuing their justice because they do have the financial muscles that are required to meet the fees.

In conclusion, there is nothing more vital than just society. A just and compassionate justice system is essential in maintaining the social security and stability of a nation. Ensuring the low and middle-income people in access justice is one of the best means of tackling inequality between the poor and the rich. Without equal judgment, individuals, whether rich, poor, or low and middle-income earner does not attain their peace, rights, and prosperity. Once justice is lost, it becomes difficult to reinstate. To create an equal justice system that caters to the poor, middle, and the wealthy class, there is a need to develop legal insurance plans and legal support hotlines. Also, there is a need to have a judicial panel of experts that are capable of offering free advice and make legal aid effective to the vulnerable in society.

References

Agénor, P. R. (2017). Caught in the Middle? The economics of Middle‐income traps. Journal of Economic Surveys, 31(3), 771-791.

Chin, W. Y. (2019). Legal Inequality: Law, the Legal System, and the Lessons of Black Experience in America. Hastings Race & Poverty LJ, 16, 109.

Green, B. (2020). The False Promise of Risk Assessments: Epistemic Reform and the Limits of Fairness. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT*’20). ACM. https://doi. org/10.1145/3351095.3372869.

Kaiser-Derrick, E. (2019). Implicating the System: Judicial Discourses in the Sentencing of Indigenous Women. Univ. of Manitoba Press.

Martin, L. (2019). An Intersectional Approach to Earlier Interventions within the Criminal Justice System in the UK: An Analysis of Two Governmental Documents.

Sidanius, J., Davis, G., & Ghani, A. (2020). The Criminal Justice System as an Instrument of Oppression. Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at Racial Prejudice in the US Criminal Justice System, 1.

Sylvestre, M. E., Blomley, N., & Bellot, C. (2020). Red Zones: Criminal Law and the Territorial Governance of Marginalized People. Cambridge University Press.