What does “access to justice” mean for the most vulnerable members of our community? Certainly, it means more than the existence of a legal system that can theoretically provide a formal remedy for a breach of their legal rights.

As has now become widely accepted, there can be no true access to justice where there are members of society, especially among marginalized groups, who: do not have adequate information or knowledge about their legal rights; cannot obtain appropriate legal assistance; fear or have no confidence in the legal system; or find the legal system financially inaccessible.

For many of our most vulnerable community members, access to justice also means a lot more than having an effective way of resolving a dispute – it is something critical to meeting their most basic needs. Without the legal services provided by not-for-profit legal and advocacy organizations, for example, many would not have the socioeconomic means to obtain the information and expertise essential to knowing and enforcing their rights to services and protections they need to survive.

Many would be denied government benefits and other critical subsidized assistance, despite their eligibility. Many would not be able to obtain a remedy for: “renovictions” (Baumann v Aarti Investments Ltd. 2018 BCSC 636);   unfair tent shelter vandalism and removals, including exposure to the spreading of chicken manure by city officials (Abbotsford (City) v Shantz, 2015 BCSC 1909); and other wrongful actions by land­lords that affect their basic housing (PHS Community Services So­ciety v. Swait, 2018 BCSC 824).

All of this would have devastating consequences that social justice organizations are all too familiar with, as the relationship between an individual’s deteriorating economic or housing situation and their worsening physical or mental disability conditions can be a vicious cycle.

For other members of our community who have been certified under the Mental Health Act and whose committal to a mental health facility is being reviewed by an independent review panel, access to justice means no less than the protection of their liberty and physical and psychological integrity. Fundamental interests are at stake in these proceedings because the panel has the power to decide whether a person will continue to be detained and whether medical treatment can continue without consent. 

For other members of our community who may have an immigration working status or a language or cultural barrier that renders their basic human rights readily exploitable, access to justice can mean attaining redress for being isolated, underfed, verbally and physically abused, forced into sexual acts, and treated like a “virtual slave” (PN v FR and another (No. 2), 2015 BCHRT 60).

In sum, access to justice means something critical to the more vulnerable members of our community and the legal services they require are not only essential to their well-being, but an invaluable and empowering means of ensuring that their most fundamental rights are protected.