Incarcerants' Vexatious Complaints
The Government of Canada, through the Correctional Services of Canada, is obviously attuned to its obligations in ensuring that federal penitentiary inmates receive their full and due considerations under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. From aging serial murderers receiving their old age security cheques, to the recognition of the importance to incarcerates to be able to cast their ballots in federal elections.
And of course, to ensuring that inmates' health conditions are flagged, and adequate medical care be given. And should they require medication or specially designed footwear, for example, these details must be assiduously understood and provided to ensure the maintenance of good health and morale. After all, society, through the government they elect and the agencies which do the good work of the nation, has a deep obligation to recognize the entitlements of all its citizens.
And although Canada has its ample share of sociopaths and psychopaths and ordinary garden-variety criminals who wreak havoc when they are loose in society, there is the prevailing wisdom that these people are human beings, just like anyone else. And as such they have inalienable entitlements which must be respected. Their morning porridge must be served hot, the cream fresh, their coffee good quality, though not necessarily organic free-trade.
But then we currently are being led, in Canada, by a Conservative government. A law-and-order government that seems to feel that it is well and good to look after the needs of people, even those incarcerated through sentences meted out by judge and jury who have carefully considered the effects of the anti-social, violent and criminal behaviour of those behind bars, but that they should serve those sentences completely.
Still, Conservative MP Roxanne James has introduced Bill C-293, that would have the effect of allowing the Commissioner of Correctional Services to identify trivial and troublesome claims that emanate from various prisoners on a personal mission to tie up the system by complaining about everything in the normal course of their prison day, objecting about services they feel to be substandard, and demanding recourse to correction.
Some of these same inmates that commonly lodge vexatious complaints because they are enabled to through the grievance process, also sue for monetary compensation when they lodge a complaint claiming that they have been ill done by. And then, if an adjudicator finds for the plaintiff who just happens to be a convicted criminal, the taxpayer not only pays for his incarceration costs, but for his hurt feelings as well.
Don Head, commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada testified before the House of Commons public safety committee about the problems mounted by inmates responsible for filing numerous yearly complaints of minor and non-existent failings. Which the grievance process must then consider and deal with, swamping the corrections staff with complaints of "too small" eggs, or "too cold" ice cream" or "too hot" light bulbs, or potatoes "not the right size".
The legitimate grievances of inmates also calling for attention, some of whom are afflicted with mental health issues, can be drowned out by the deliberately frivolous complaints. "...because of the way the law is written right now ... [the offender] can be unhappy with an answer and immediately file a second-level grievance" in the four-level grievance process.
A cumbersome bureaucracy in the prison system, just as there is in any government installation. However, "Making a hobby of filing meritless grievances, I believe, makes a mockery of our correctional system and the entire grievance process", said Ms. James. "This bill is going to seek to address that small loophole we need to close to make sure our system actually works the way it was intended to."
Those on the public safety committee who represent the Opposition, have, as one might expect, expressed concerns that the bill as proposed lacks specific criteria to identify vexatious complainants, and could result in correctional officials abusing this new 'power'.
If all of this is not entirely predictable, what then is it?
And of course, to ensuring that inmates' health conditions are flagged, and adequate medical care be given. And should they require medication or specially designed footwear, for example, these details must be assiduously understood and provided to ensure the maintenance of good health and morale. After all, society, through the government they elect and the agencies which do the good work of the nation, has a deep obligation to recognize the entitlements of all its citizens.
And although Canada has its ample share of sociopaths and psychopaths and ordinary garden-variety criminals who wreak havoc when they are loose in society, there is the prevailing wisdom that these people are human beings, just like anyone else. And as such they have inalienable entitlements which must be respected. Their morning porridge must be served hot, the cream fresh, their coffee good quality, though not necessarily organic free-trade.
But then we currently are being led, in Canada, by a Conservative government. A law-and-order government that seems to feel that it is well and good to look after the needs of people, even those incarcerated through sentences meted out by judge and jury who have carefully considered the effects of the anti-social, violent and criminal behaviour of those behind bars, but that they should serve those sentences completely.
Still, Conservative MP Roxanne James has introduced Bill C-293, that would have the effect of allowing the Commissioner of Correctional Services to identify trivial and troublesome claims that emanate from various prisoners on a personal mission to tie up the system by complaining about everything in the normal course of their prison day, objecting about services they feel to be substandard, and demanding recourse to correction.
Some of these same inmates that commonly lodge vexatious complaints because they are enabled to through the grievance process, also sue for monetary compensation when they lodge a complaint claiming that they have been ill done by. And then, if an adjudicator finds for the plaintiff who just happens to be a convicted criminal, the taxpayer not only pays for his incarceration costs, but for his hurt feelings as well.
Don Head, commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada testified before the House of Commons public safety committee about the problems mounted by inmates responsible for filing numerous yearly complaints of minor and non-existent failings. Which the grievance process must then consider and deal with, swamping the corrections staff with complaints of "too small" eggs, or "too cold" ice cream" or "too hot" light bulbs, or potatoes "not the right size".
The legitimate grievances of inmates also calling for attention, some of whom are afflicted with mental health issues, can be drowned out by the deliberately frivolous complaints. "...because of the way the law is written right now ... [the offender] can be unhappy with an answer and immediately file a second-level grievance" in the four-level grievance process.
A cumbersome bureaucracy in the prison system, just as there is in any government installation. However, "Making a hobby of filing meritless grievances, I believe, makes a mockery of our correctional system and the entire grievance process", said Ms. James. "This bill is going to seek to address that small loophole we need to close to make sure our system actually works the way it was intended to."
Those on the public safety committee who represent the Opposition, have, as one might expect, expressed concerns that the bill as proposed lacks specific criteria to identify vexatious complainants, and could result in correctional officials abusing this new 'power'.
If all of this is not entirely predictable, what then is it?
Labels: Crime, Government of Canada, Human Relations
posted by Pieface | 6:40 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home