Public confidence in criminal justice in Canada: a comparative and contextual analysis.

• Author: Roberts, Julian V.

How much trust do Canadians have in their criminal justice system? In other countries, concern has been expressed over an alleged "crisis in public confidence" regarding criminal justice (see Hough and Roberts 2004). In Canada, there is at least a recognition of the importance of the issue of public confidence in criminal justice. As Canada's Chief Justice noted, "[T]he justice system stands in need as never before of its public's confidence. Without public confidence, the task of lawyers and courts becomes more difficult" (McLachlin 2003: 278).

Is there a crisis in confidence in Canada? As will be demonstrated in this article, the issue of public trust in the system has recently become a priority in a number of jurisdictions, particularly the United States and the United Kingdom (see Sherman 2002; Hough and Roberts 2004). There are several explanations for this recent and growing interest on the part of researchers and governments. Public confidence is important to the functioning of the justice system, which depends in the first instance upon crime victims' seeing a benefit to reporting victimizations to the police. Almost all personal injury offences come to the attention of the police as a result of a report by a victim or witness--members of the general public. In addition, public participation is often crucial to the effective prosecution of accused persons. (2) Without the cooperation of complainants, witnesses and jurors, the system would ultimately fail. Low levels of public confidence in the justice system also provoke calls to change the system: a survey conducted in the United States found that more than four out of five respondents favoured the idea of "totally revamping the way that the [criminal justice] system works" (see Sherman 2002: 24). This desire for radical change reflects a lack of confidence in the way that the system currently functions (or, more accurately, is perceived to function).

Recent research drawing upon the 2003 administration of the General Social Survey (GSS), which focused on social engagement, has uncovered another reason why levels of confidence in justice and other public institutions are important. Canadians were asked to express their level of confidence in a number of public institutions and also to state the extent to which they felt a sense of belonging to Canada. Individuals who had more confidence in Canada's public institutions reported a greater sense of belonging to the country (Statistics Canada 2003). Although correlational in nature, (3) this finding suggests that public confidence in critical institutions such as the justice system promotes social cohesion, an important goal for any society.

Effect of public confidence on criminal policy development

Criminal policy development over the years has been influenced by the perception that public levels of confidence have been waning. Reform of the youth justice system represents a good example. A collapse of public confidence with respect to the Young Offenders Act was a primary factor in the government's decision to introduce a new statute (the Youth Criminal Justice Act). The minister of justice at the time initially proposed youth justice reforms at a speech to the Canadian bar in 1997. In the course of this speech, she related the proposed reforms directly to public opinion by citing a national opinion poll that found that 70% of Canadians had no confidence in the YOA (Canada, Department of Justice 1997).

Other examples can be found from policy developments over the past few years. According to section 745.6 of the Criminal Code, most prisoners serving life terms in excess of 15 years may make an application for a jury review of their parole eligibility dates. Widespread negative publicity of several applications under the so-called "faint hope" clause prompted amendments to the section, in large measure because of community opposition--public confidence regarding the correctional system was declining (see Roberts and Cole 1999). Similarly, the creation of mandatory minimum sentences of imprisonment for serious offences committed with a firearm in 1997 has also been cited as an example of government policy's being influenced by an attempt to placate public opinion or promote public confidence in criminal justice (see Doob and Cesaroni 2001). A number of specific reform proposals have been advanced in recent years with the explicit intention of promoting public confidence. Thus Greenspan, Matheson, and Davis (1998) called for the abolition of parole in large part in order to promote public confidence in the administration of justice. More recently, five provinces have called for amendments to the conditional sentencing regime to create a statutory bar to the imposition of a conditional sentence for a number of offences, including "crimes of serious violence." The provinces argue that allowing offenders convicted of these offences to serve their prison sentences in the community brings the conditional sentence regime into disrepute and undermines public confidence in the criminal justice system (Alberta Justice and Attorney General 2003).

Promoting public confidence in criminal justice

A number of countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Australia, have conducted surveys to measure public confidence levels (e.g., Parmentier, Cloet, Biren, Vanderhallen, Vandekeere, Van Win, Schoffelen, Sintobin, Vervaeke, Doutrelepont, Kellens, Goethals, and Lemaitre 2004). The findings from these surveys have been used to devise strategies to respond to low levels of public confidence. Several countries (in particular the United States (4)) have created programs designed to promote public confidence in the administration of justice (see Hough and Roberts 2004, for a review of these programs). In addition, promoting public confidence has emerged as a policy priority. For example, in England and Wales, the three main government criminal justice departments share the following mandate: "To improve public confidence in the criminal justice system." This goal has manifested itself in a number of specific reform initiatives. Thus the 2002 White Paper, which gave rise to the Criminal Justice Act 2003, sets out a series of reforms "to create a system that meets the needs of society and wins the trust of citizens" (U.K., Secretary of State 2002: 13). A year earlier, the report of the Home Office review of sentencing set out a framework that in the words of its authors "should increase the contribution of sentencing to crime reduction and public confidence" (U.K., Home Office 2001: i).

Although local initiatives have been launched to promote public confidence in specific branches of criminal justice, with one exception, no level of government has undertaken any systematic initiative to promote the image of justice and hence the level of public confidence. In 1998, the Alberta Attorney General convened a summit to "build consensus on actions for improving public confidence and community participation in the justice system" (qtd. in Alberta Justice 1999). The summit's final report was released a few months later and contained 25 core recommendations that reflect eight themes advanced at the meetings. The summit report notes that "[a] lack of knowledge, education and awareness among Albertans about the justice system was seen as a major barrier to improving the system ... delegates felt improving knowledge and understanding of the system would eliminate a lot of frustration, fear and conflict" (Alberta Justice 1999: 5). The recommendations with respect to the issue of public confidence include some specific items, such as an ongoing review of the justice system through further summit meetings. Unlike many other jurisdictions where the confidence initiatives were "one-off" in nature, the Alberta government conducted a follow-up and "reported back" to the public about steps taken to implement the recommendations of the summit. A number of specific initiatives were undertaken under the theme of public knowledge, education, and awareness.

Purpose of article

Public confidence or trust in the administration of justice is, therefore, an important issue of interest to scholars and policy makers as well as practitioners (see Rottman and Tomkins 1999). Criminal justice professionals need to have a realistic perception of public confidence levels, and policy makers need to know whether confidence levels are declining. They also need to know which specific policies are promoting or undermining confidence in the justice system and whether low public confidence reflects a lack of knowledge of the criminal process. Despite the importance of the issue, to date there has been no attempt to evaluate the overall state of public confidence in the Canadian criminal justice system. This article addresses this important void in our knowledge.

Since the publication a generation ago of findings from the Legal Research Institute Survey (Moore 1985; see also Brillon 1985), the issue of public confidence has received scant attention from Canadian scholars. Although several nationwide surveys have recently measured public confidence in justice in Canada, none have been published. Some data on public perceptions of justice have been released through the GSS (see later sections of this article). Many polls have simply been catalogued within the sponsoring government department, without wider circulation. This article reviews the published and unpublished literature with a view to addressing the following questions: (1) How much confidence do Canadians express in their justice system? (2) How do levels of public confidence in Canada compare with those in other jurisdictions? (3) How much variation in confidence levels exists across public institutions and between specific branches of the justice system? (4) Is there any evidence that levels of public confidence in justice have declined in recent years?

Confidence in...