by The Honourable Chief Judge Hugh C Stansfield

Has the recent and material erosion of public confidence in public justice systems reached crisis proportions? It is a serious question that deserves serious consideration.

Lawyers and judges often suggest the lack of confidence reflects only the public’s failure to understand what it is we do; but communication connotes a two-way exchange. We need to listen to the public we serve. While there is in fact public misapprehension regarding justice issues, I hear lots of criticism from reasonable persons who are reasonably informed.

Beyond the over-arching retributive cry for more people to be sent to jail for longer, much public criticism relates to broad considerations of access to justice, or at least the lack thereof.

Whether our justice system regains public confidence will be determined to a great extent by whether we – the Bar, the Bench, and government – effect material improvements in access to justice. Our seeming incapacity to change – to really change – may in large part be attributable to the fact that we operate in systems which were designed by lawyers and judges to serve the needs and interests of lawyers and judges. We have tended to ignore or to discount the perspective of our “customers,” the average citizens and small businesses who need, and increasingly expect, speedy, inexpensive and simple processes through which they can resolve disputes.

Like the dinosaur, we must adapt or perish. In our case “perishing” likely means having much of what we believe to be most valuable overtaken by legislation which has, as its genesis, public cynicism as to our ability to serve the public reasonably.

The good news is that all courts in B.C. are trying to make changes that will improve access. The question that remains is whether we are doing more than “moving the deck chairs.”

In the Provincial Court, we have begun a civil pilot with lawyer/adjudicators providing a “one-stop shopping,” expedited (one-hour) and dispositive hearing for disputes under $5,000. Simple debt claims have another one-step summary process. Disputes between $5,000 and $25,000 are being mediated by non-judge mediators. Trials are simplified and expedited through brief pre-trial conferences.

We continue to resolve a very high percentage of parenting disputes through non-adjudicative mediation-styled case conferences which not only generate better outcomes and reduce collateral damage to children, but are as understandable in process as a discussion around the kitchen table. We have numerous criminal reform initiatives: the first Community Court in Canada; a continuing and successful Drug Court; B.C.’s first restorative justice First Nations Court; “Compliance Court” to expedite alleged breaches of court orders; movement of non-adjudicative work away from judges; and creating a new class of lawyer/JJPs to determine bail and search warrant applications.

As worthy as these initiatives are, we need to do much more in listening and being seen to listen to the public, creating access points for the public to participate in and gain some sense of ownership in “their” justice system, and to demonstrate that all of us within the justice system share the public objective of achieving safer communities, and faster, simpler, and more understandable resolution of civil and family disputes.

“Access to Justice” is the essential goal which should be shared by all of us. If we don’t adapt our processes to meet the needs of the community more effectively, why should they reasonably bestow upon us the precious commodity that is their confidence?

The Honourable Chief Judge Hugh C. Stansfield, Provincial Court of British Columbia

This article was published in the April 2008 issue of BarTalk and is subject to the copyright by the British Columbia Branch of the Canadian Bar Association, 2008, all rights reserved.