Language selection

Government of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada

Search

Introduction

Introduction [PDF - 2.64 MB]

Foreword by the Ombudsperson

We all know there is a problem. Survivors of sexual violence have repeatedly described instances of revictimization in the criminal legal system. We’ve had decades of recommendations and reforms, but we’ve heard “The more things change, the more they remain the same.”[1]

Our libraries, newspapers, and courtrooms are filled with stories of secondary victimization, where survivors who have asked for justice have been further harmed in the legal system.

The harm is so well recognized that police officers and Crown attorneys regularly caution survivors against reporting or pursuing charges. The administration of justice is in open disrepute.[2]

We all want to do better. Across the criminal legal system, there are many thoughtful and compassionate police officers, Crown prosecutors, defence lawyers, and judges doing their best to balance the needs of survivors with the rights of the accused to a fair trial. These are constitutional rights that must be protected in a free and fair society.

 “When will the Charter protect us?”

- SISSA Survivor Survey, Response #837

Survivors of sexual violence also have constitutional rights. Their Charter rights to life, liberty, and security of the person, equality and equal protection of the law need much greater recognition.

We feel a sacred responsibility to honour what we have heard, knowing that we can never capture all that needs to be said, and we will inevitably have gaps in our analyses that leave needs unaddressed. Even so, I'm in awe of the thousands of people who have contributed their lived expertise to help us better understand harms caused by the criminal justice system (CJS) and imagine a more just and compassionate future.

Thank you.

Dr. Benjamin Roebuck
Federal Ombudsperson for Victims of Crime

Foreword by the Lead Investigator

To all the survivors who shared your experiences with me:

I am so grateful to each of you. I feel honoured that you entrusted me with your experiences and your raw emotions. It took a lot of strength to share some very difficult memories, and you did so with grace and sincerity. Some of you travelled significant distances to meet me in person. Some of you brought support people with you. Many of you felt a lot of pain in the retelling, but you kept going. You got it out, and you did it so clearly.

Some of you spoke on behalf of young children, who couldn’t speak for themselves. Some of you spoke on behalf of victims of trafficking, who couldn’t speak for themselves. Many of you had to take time off work and arrange for childcare to meet with me. Some of you spoke from within the confines of a prison and were still able to share your experiences with dignity.

I don’t take any of it for granted. It took a lot of thoughtfulness to wrap your complex experiences up into a one-hour interview. I learned so much from all of you. You shared selflessly, to make things better for other people. Your voices matter, and you are the heart of this report.

Thank you.

I am also grateful to those stakeholders, academics, advocates, lawyers, police officers, victim support workers, friends, and family members, who met with us. You have compassion and you work hard to make a difference. Many of you are also survivors. You see the gaps, you experience vicarious trauma, you feel so frustrated that change is slow despite speaking out and pointing out the problems, over and over and over again. Yet you persevere. Survivors have spoken to me about you. They told me you are their lifeline: without you they would not have been able to carry on. Despite all the barriers, you make such a difference to those you support.

Thank you.

We hope that this investigation will elevate and centre the voices of survivors, and the voices of advocates. Together we can make change happen.

Hoori Hamboyan
Principal Investigator, OFOVC

A note on language

In alignment with principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), every effort has been made to ensure that the language used in this document is inclusive, respectful, and free from bias. This includes the use of gender-neutral terms, culturally sensitive references, and person-first language wherever appropriate.

References to individuals’ gender identities reflect the self-reported gender of those involved, as shared during interviews, intake processes, or official documentation. The use of gendered language (e.g., he/him, she/her, they/them) is intended to respect and accurately represent how individuals identify themselves.

We recognize that language is constantly evolving, and that inclusive communication requires ongoing reflection and adaptation. If any terminology used in this document appears outdated or non-inclusive, it is unintentional, and we welcome feedback to support ongoing learning and improvement in our equity, diversity, and inclusion practices.

We know that words can fail to capture some lived experience. We also know that people who have experienced sexual violence do not all self-identify as survivors, complainants, or victims. We respectfully use this language in the following ways:

The Canadian Victims Bill of Rights (CVBR) defines a victim as “an individual who has suffered physical or emotional harm, property damage or economic loss as the result of the commission or alleged commission of an offence.”[3] The rights apply to all interactions with the CJS from the time an offence is reported to the police.[4]

A note on gender

We aim to use an inclusive lens while still recognizing that sexualized violence is gendered.[5] Anyone can be a target of sexual violence, and all experiences of sexual violence can involve complicated gender-based power dynamics.[6] We will discuss the gendered impact of sexual violence in society, but it is clear that women, girls and gender diverse people experience higher rates of sexual violence than men and boys, and the criminal legal system continues to disadvantage female and gender diverse survivors.

At the same time, sexual violence experienced by men and boys is often minimized, and men report having difficulty finding support services that are responsive to the impact of sexual violence on lived experiences of masculinities.[7]

Strengthening responses to gender-based violence is vital to achieving greater gender equality.

OFOVC Mandate

The Office of the Federal Ombudsperson for Victims of Crime was established in 2007 through an Order-in-Council. It operates at arm’s length from the Department of Justice.[8]

The Ombudsperson is appointed by the Governor-in-Council and serves as a Special Advisor to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and the Minister of Public Safety.

The Office has exclusively federal jurisdiction. It reviews complaints from victims of crime about their interactions with federal victim services and helps to ensure policymakers understand systemic issues that negatively affect victims of crime.

Powers: The Ombudsperson has authority to make recommendations to government and to require a response.[9] This helps to ensure accountability and transparency.

Thank you to our partners and collaborators

Partners and Contributors

We wish to properly recognize those who contributed to this report; there are so many. Whether by granting us an interview, completing a survey, participating in a consultation table, or providing a written submission, your input was invaluable. We are grateful to all of you for generously lending us your voice. Your willingness to share made it possible for us to learn, reflect, and carry this work forward with greater understanding. We have dedicated a section of this report – Gratitude - to honour and acknowledge your contributions with the respect you deserve.

Our Expert Advisory Circle

An Expert Advisory Circle (EAC), chaired by Sunny Marriner, has been convening to support this investigation, enhancing its effectiveness and inclusivity.

The EAC was composed of 16 members from across Canada, including survivor-advocates, legal professionals, clinicians, frontline anti-violence workers, and academics. The EAC played a central role in guiding the investigation, offering insights on emerging issues, identifying gaps, and validating findings.

The time and expertise of these amazing individuals ensured that voices of survivors remain at the forefront and that a diverse range of perspectives and expertise were included in our investigative process.Realizing the requests for support and the demands you and your respective organizations face, words cannot express how thankful we are to each of you for your advice and contribution.

We were honoured to have Sunny Marriner serve as Chair of the EAC. Sunny brings extensive experience in community and legal responses to sexual violence and has served as an expert witness in sexual assault trials and human rights tribunals. In 2016, she established Canada’s first Violence Against Women Advocate Case Review program, which has since spread to communities across Canada.

Introduction

    “A fundamental shift is necessary. After decades of systemic failures, it is evident that the system is deeply flawed and in     desperate need of reform. To truly address this crisis, we must prioritize the voices of survivors. When the needle isn’t moving,     it’s time to look around the room and figure out whose ideas, talents and perspectives are missing. To be clear, that means     that when it’s time to decide how to respond to this inquiry, it is not enough to have gathered evidence from us and then     decide on action items without us. It is time to centre our experiences and expertise in order to create a justice system that is     truly victim-centred and effective.” [10]

Sexual violence is a profoundly harmful experience. For many survivors, this harm is compounded by the way they are treated within the CJS. Survivors who have contacted our Office describe feeling retraumatized, dismissed, and unsafe in a system meant to protect them. Their human rights are too often overlooked, their dignity compromised, and their voices sidelined.

In February 2024, the Federal Ombudsperson for Victims of Crime advised the Government of Canada that the Office was launching a national systemic investigation on how survivors of sexual violence are treated in the criminal legal system,[11] This investigation was prompted by long-standing concerns raised by survivors, advocates, and legal professionals about persistent barriers to justice and the urgent need for reform.

Why Now?

Survivors and advocates have been calling for change for decades. The #MeToo movement launched widespread nation-wide conversations and media reports about barriers to reporting and the hurdles survivors face when they do report. There was an increase in calls to our Office about troubling experiences with the CJS for survivors of sexual assault. In addition, since the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) in R v. Jordan,[12] an increasing number of sexual violence cases have been dismissed for delay.[13] For some, this creates immediate safety risks.[14]

Legislative changes to publication bans in 2023[15] have also made it easier for survivors to talk about their experiences in the legal system. In the coming years, Canada will face a wave of survivor-driven accountability that was partially silenced under previous rules.[16]

Structure of the report

This report is composed of chapters that stem from themes and issues raised during the course of our investigation. Each chapter can be read on its own and begins with a two-page highlight section outlining the issue at hand, key statistics, takeaways, and recommendations.

Guiding frameworks

This investigation was guided by a rights-based and survivor-centred approach drawing on domestic legal obligations and established principles of fairness. These frameworks informed both the design of our investigation and our evaluation of how the CJS treats survivors of sexual violence.

Canadian Victims Bill of Rights

The Canadian Victims Bill of Rights (CVBR)[17] is a quasi-constitutional law passed in 2015. The CVBR provides victims rights to information, participation, protection, seek restitution, and provides a mechanism to file complaints when these rights are violated.

As a federal complaints mechanism for victims of crime, we help to ensure the primacy of the CVBR is respected and upheld.

Section 21 of the CVBR states:

To the extent that it is possible to do so, every Act of Parliament enacted — and every order, rule or regulation made under such an Act — before, on or after the day on which this Act comes into force must be construed and applied in a manner that is compatible with the rights under this Act.[18]

The following expectations established in the preamble of the CVBR guide our investigation:

  1. Charter rights: Are victims’ rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms fully considered before being balanced against the rights of the accused?
    • How are these Charter rights being interpreted?
    • Are the Charter rights of victims fully considered before they are balanced with the rights of the accused under section 1 of the Charter?
  1. Consideration of victim rights is in the interest of the proper administration of justice.
    • How are courts and criminal justice agencies respecting Parliament’s direction to consider victim rights as part of the proper administration of justice?
  1. It is important for victim rights to be considered throughout the criminal justice system.
    • Are victim rights to information, participation, and protection being considered from first contact with police through to sentence expiry in cases with a conviction?
  1. Victims of crime and their families deserve to be treated with courtesy, compassion and respect, including respect for their dignity.
    • Would a reasonable person consider the treatment of survivors of sexual violence and their families in the criminal legal system to be courteous, compassionate, respectful, and mindful of their dignity?

We ask: Is it possible to do better?

Procedural fairness

In thinking about our investigation, we also drew on the principles of procedural fairness, outlined in the Canadian Association of Parliamentary Ombudsman’s Guide, Fairness By Design (2022). Under administrative law principles, public services are required to serve the public in a way that provides a fair process, fair treatment, and fair decisions.[19]

This framework emphasizes three dimensions of fairness:

Fair Process: must be used when public organizations make decisions that will impact certain people, groups, or organizations. Fair process requires:

Fair Decision: must be taken by public organizations to follow rules, be equitable and use fair discretion, in combination with fair policies and processes. Fair decisions require:

Fair Service: People must be treated fairly by public organizations when accessing programs and services. This includes being respectful, accessible and responsive as well as accountable. Fair service requires:

These dimensions are operationalized through seven fairness standards, which informed our evaluation of the criminal justice system’s treatment of survivors.

Fair Process

Standard 1: Participation and Being Heard

Standard 2: Impartiality and Integrity

Fair Decision

Standard 3: Lawful and Fair Rules

Standard 4: Reasoned Decision

Standard 5: Equity

Fair Service

Standard 6: Accessibility and Responsiveness

Standard 7: Accountability

We also drew on principles of procedural justice, which emphasize the importance of voice, dignity, neutrality, and trust in institutional processes. While closely related to procedural fairness, procedural justice focuses more explicitly on how individuals experience fairness in practice, particularly in interactions with legal and institutional actors.

Honouring the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls

This investigation was also informed by the 231 Calls for Justice issued by the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG). These Calls reflect the lived experiences of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis women, girls and  2SLGBTQIA+ people, including those who are victimized by sexual violence.

At the outset of our investigation, we undertook a targeted review to identify how our work could contribute to addressing these Calls. An alignment table outlining relevant Calls for Justice and corresponding findings from this investigation is provided in Annex C. This includes Calls addressing sustainable funding for survivors supports, trauma-informed justice responses, culturally safe corrections, distinction-based data collection, and the need for accessible, Indigenous-led services.

By grounding our investigation in these Calls for Justice, we aim to honour the leadership of Indigenous survivors and families and reinforce the obligation of governments, institutions, and justice actions to respond with sustained, systemic action.

Methodology

We used a mixed methods approach to centre survivors’ experiences and identify systemic issues across the CJS. This included collecting both qualitative and quantitative data, as well as conducting a legal and media review. We also implemented inclusion measures to allow for broad and diverse participation, while acknowledging the barriers and limitations that shaped our findings.

Scope and upcoming special releases

When we initially launched this investigation, our Office planned to focus specifically on the experiences of survivors of sexual assault within Canada’s CJS. However, early engagement with survivors and stakeholders quickly revealed experiences and systemic issues that extended beyond our original intent. In response, we widened our scope from sexual assault to sexual violence more broadly, capturing a wider spectrum of survivors’ experiences.

We also heard compelling testimony on three intersecting themes that warrant distinct and focused attention:

Due to the complexity and distinct nature of these issues, rather than compress them into this report, we have chosen to produce a series of special thematic releases. These forthcoming publications stem directly from the data, and insights gathered during our investigation, ensuring that these voices continue to inform reform efforts and public understanding in a focused and meaningful way.

We are especially grateful to organizations that co-facilitated targeted consultations on these topics, including the Canadian Centre to End Human Trafficking (CCTEHT), the Sexual Misconduct Support and Resource Centre (SMSRC), the network of Canadian CYACs (including Luna in Calgary) and the Office of the Correctional Investigator (OCI). Their contribution and collaboration were critical to ensuring that the voices of survivors were meaningfully included.

Survivor engagement

Interviews

We conducted interviews with 107 survivors of sexual violence who responded to our public call for participation. Outreach was conducted through a press release, social media, our website, and stakeholder networks. Survivor interviews were held early in the investigation to inform subsequent consultations.

Interviews were semi-structured and flexible,[20] inviting participants to share their experiences in their own words. Survivors were interviewed virtually, by phone, or in-person, depending on their preference.

We also conducted interviews in two federal prisons in collaboration with the Office of the Correctional Investigator, speaking with 13 incarcerated women and gender-diverse individuals about pathways to criminalization as well as with staff of those institutions.

To protect privacy and safety, interviews were not recorded, and no identifying notes were kept. Participants provided written or verbal consent and were provided a resource list and self-care guidance following each interview.

Survey

We received 1,000 responses to an anonymous online survey for adult survivors of sexual violence in Canada.[21] The survey explored experiences with police, courts, sentencing and corrections, as well as issues related to the transfers of military sexual assault cases, non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), testimonial aids, victim impact statements, victim rights, and restorative justice.

We heard from survivors in every province and territory, from urban, rural and remote communities. Many had experienced multiple forms of sexual violence.

 

Table 1

Survivor Demographics (N = 1,000) *

 

 

n

%

 

 

  

 

Province or territory

 

 

 Alberta

116

11.6

 British Columbia

137

13.7

 Manitoba

18

1.8

 New Brunswick

9

0.9

 Newfoundland and Labrador

5

0.5

 Northwest Territories

5

0.5

 Nova Scotia

39

3.9

 Nunavut

2

0.2

 Ontario

422

42.2

 Outside of Canada

2

0.2

 Prince Edward Island

7

0.7

 Quebec

199

19.9

 Saskatchewan

29

2.9
 Yukon

10

1.0

 

Total

1,000

 

 

 

Community Type

 

 

 

 Urban

751

75.1

 

 Rural

190

19.0

 

 Remote or Northern

54

5.4

 

 Prefer not to answer

5

0.5

 

 Total

1,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New to living in Canada
(< 5 Years)

 

 

 

 No

850

85.0

 

 Yes

144

14.4

 

Prefer not to answer

Total

6

1,000

0.6

 

 

 

Identify as a person with a disability **

 

 

 

 No

498

49.8

 

 Yes

447

44.7

 

 Prefer not to answer

55

5.5

 

 Total

1,000

 

 

 

 

Age Groups

 

 

 

 16-17

3

0.3

 

 18-24

121

12.1

 

 25-34

290

29.0

 

 35-44

283

28.3

 

 45-54

165

16.5

 

 55+

129

12.9

 

 Prefer not to say

9

0.9

 

 Total

1,000

 

 

 

Gender Identity

 

 

 

 Woman

894

89.4

 

 Man

32

3.2

 

 Non-binary

57

5.7

 

 Prefer to self-identify (e.g. agender, genderqueer)

8

0.8

 

 Prefer not to answer

9

0.9

 

 Total

 

1,000

 
 

 

Identify as 2SLGBTQIA+

 

 

 

 No

590

59

 

 Yes

361

36.1

 

 Prefer not to answer

49

4.9

 

Total

1,000

 

 

 

Sexual and Gender Diversity

 

 

 

 Straight or Heterosexual

590

59

 

 2S Two-Spirit

6

0.6

 

 Lesbian

23

2.3

 

 Gay

6

0.6

 

 Bisexual

168

16.8

 

 Transgender

6

0.6

 

 Queer

89

8.9

 

 Sexual/gender diverse community

63

6.3

 

 Prefer not to answer

Prefer to self-identify (e.g. asexual, pansexual)

49

 

4.9

 

 

 Total

1,140

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ethnicity Breakdown

 

 

 

 Caucasian (White)

853

85.3

 

 Black

30

3.0

 

 First Nations

73

7.3

 

 Inuit

4

0.4

 

 Métis

37

3.7

 

 Arab

8

0.8

 

 Chinese

17

1.7

 

 Filipino

6

0.6

 

 Japanese

6

0.6

 

 Korean

3

0.3

 

 Latin American

19

1.9

 

 South Asian (East Indian, Pakistani)

17

1.7

 

 Southeast Asian (Vietnamese, Cambodia)

6

0.6

 

 West Asian (Lebanese, Iranian, Syrian)

10

1.0

 

Prefer not to answer

 28

2.8

 

 Other population groups

2

0.2

 

  Total 1,121

 

 

 

First Language Learned

 

 

 

 English

720

72.0

 

 French

245

24.5

 

 Indigenous language

12

1.2

 

 Chinese

5

0.5

 

 Spanish

11

1.1

 

 Punjabi

3

0.3

 

 Arabic

3

0.3

 

 Tagalog

2

0.2

 

 Other language

38

3.8

 

 Prefer not to answer

14

1.4

 

 Total

1,043

 
       

* Participants could choose more than one category for certain questions. Participants could skip any questions.

**Our question was “Do you identify as a person with a disability? (Sensory, physical, pain-related, mental health-related, cognitive, or other disability)”

Stakeholder engagement

In addition to survivor voices, we engaged with more than 1,400 stakeholders through a combination of:

 

 Number Held      Consultation Tables
 Legal Perspectives
1  Law Enforcement
1  Crown Attorneys
2  Independent Legal Advice (ILA)
1  Women’s Advocacy and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
3  Restorative Justice and Alternative Justice Models
 Services for Survivors
6  Independent Sexual Assault Centres
3  Victim Services
1  University and College Campuses
 Population Groups
2  First Nations, Inuit, and Métis
2  Black and Racialized Communities
3  Children and Youth
1  Newcomers
1  People living with disabilities
1  2SLGBTQIA+
1  Men and Boys
 Contexts
6  Human Trafficking
1  Military Survivors of Sexual Assault
 36  Total Consultation Tables

 

Collaboration with systemic review in British Columbia: Our survivor and stakeholder surveys asked people living in BC if they would like to share their responses with the Systemic Review of the Legal System’s Treatment of Sexual and Intimate Partner Violence commissioned by the provincial government. We received consent from 123 survivors and 93 stakeholders.

Written Submissions

Between 2024 to March 2025, we received 48 written submissions from survivors, stakeholders, and organizations. These included personal experiences, policy briefs, and previously published reports relevant to our investigation.

Roundtables

We would like to thank the Canadian Centre to End Human Trafficking for their help with organizing and moderating the consultation tables on sex trafficking. We would also like to thank the LUNA Child and Youth Advocacy Centre for helping with the children and youth consultations. We also thank the Gatehouse for their help organizing the consultation table on restorative justice. A special thanks also goes to Sexual Violence Advisory Group Ontario Crowns Meaghan Cunningham and Teresa Donnelly for their expert legal lens. 

Two focus groups were held in person at the Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic, who specialize in legal, counselling and interpretation assistance to women and gender diverse folk who may be marginalized, racialized and experienced violence. Thirteen lawyers and case managers participated in these focus groups. We also held a focus group with representatives from Athletes Empowered, Gymnasts for Change, and Stop Educator Child Exploitation: they provided key information on sexual abuse of children, including in sport.  

Data collection and analysis

We designed a multi-method engagement strategy that prioritized accessibility, trauma-informed engagement, and intersectional representation. Our approach included survivor and stakeholder interviews, consultation tables, surveys, written submissions, and legal, academic literature and media reviews.

Engagement was offered in both official languages, with accommodations for sign language and support persons. In-person interviews were primarily conducted in Ottawa, with some taken place in Québec, British Columbia, and Saskatchewan.

Qualitative Analysis

We used ATLAS.ti, qualitative data analysis software, to organize and code large volumes of textual data. This included notes from survivor and stakeholder interviews, consultation tables, written submissions, legal cases, academic reports, and media articles.

Quantitative Analysis

Survey data were analyzed using Stata, a statistical software program commonly used in social science research. We used descriptive statistics, such as frequencies, percentages, and means to summarize responses and highlight trends.

Group comparisons were conducted using cross-tabulations and appropriate statistical tests (e.g., chi-square tests, t-tests) to explore differences based on demographics, professional roles, and other relevant variables.

Legal and media review

Case law: We reviewed more than 750 legal cases, using CanLII, WestLaw, and LexusNexis. We focused on cases that intersected sexual violence with the Criminal Code, Charter of Rights and Freedoms,[23] or the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights (CVBR). This included case law on testimonial aids, records applications, victim impact statements; Jordan applications, Charter rights of victims of crime, and non-disclosure agreements, to name a few topics. We also reviewed facta from several recent appeals which have not yet been decided. We also received permission to observe several trials, including R v. McLeod et al, via Zoom.

Media analysis: We reviewed 239 media articles published between 2000-2025 related to key issues including non-disclosure agreements, R v. Jordan and 11(b) applications, military survivors of sexual violence, sexual violence in sport, and victim privacy. These were organized and reviewed in ATLAS.ti with support from the Victimology Research at Algonquin College. Media analysis helped us identify relevant stakeholders, case studies, and findings from investigative journalists.

Accessibility and inclusion measures

From the outset, we prioritized accessibility and inclusion to ensure that survivors and stakeholders from diverse backgrounds could meaningfully participate in the investigation. Recognizing that access looks different for different people, we designed a flexible engagement strategy.

We offered multiple ways for survivors and stakeholders to share their experiences in both official languages and sign language, including:

We also made deliberate efforts to reach historically underrepresented populations, including:

Limitations and barriers

It was important to make participation accessible through various means, but there were limitations to our data collection.

We had limited participation from Yukon (9), Northwest Territories (16), Nunavut (9), and PEI (16).

Advisory and consultative structures

About our Expert Advisory Circle members

Sunny Marriner - Chair

As the National Lead of the Improving Institutional Accountability Project (IIAP), Sunny Marriner spearheaded the introduction of independent advocate-led case reviews in uncharged sexual assault investigations across Canada and internationally. IIAP’s independent police oversight model, Violence Against Women Advocate Case Review (VACR), is today used in over 30 Canadian communities over five provinces. Sunny’s focus is advancing systemic change in responses to sexual violence across institutional and criminal justice frameworks by prioritizing systemic accountability, independent oversight, and improved data collection, while centering the role of feminist frontline, survivor-led advocacy movements as the key drivers of systemic change for women and girls in Canada.

Sunny’s work is grounded in 27 years of advocacy and support to survivors of sexual violence as part of the Canadian independent feminist sexual assault centre movement. She regularly serves in provincial, national, and international capacities addressing police, legal, and state responses to sexual violence.

Corinne Ofstie

Corinne is the Co-Chief Executive Officer at Association of Alberta Sexual Assault Services (AASAS). She has expertise working as a cross-sector coordinator within community, system and government organizations in both the sexual and domestic violence services sectors. In her role with AASAS, Corinne works to achieve the goals and objectives of numerous special projects including the Workplace Sexual Harassment Awareness Campaign and Training project. Among her many achievements, Corinne co-chaired the provincial Collaborative Justice Response to Sexual Violence Committee and was a member of the Gender Equality Network of Canada from 2017 to 2020. In 2018 Corinne was awarded Avenue Magazine’s #Top40Under40. She is a member of the Rebuilding Lives Committee for the Canadian Women’s Foundation and an Expert Advisory Panel member of Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability.

Deepa Mattoo

Deepa Mattoo is a dedicated lawyer and intersectional feminist recognized for her commitment to advancing equity, anti-oppression, and anti-racism. Her extensive career spans various legal and leadership roles. Since 2019, Deepa has served as the Executive Director of the Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic, overseeing multiple departments and directing the Clinic’s intervention and advocacy efforts. She has appeared before the SCC, parliamentary committees, and UN civil society meetings, advocating on a broad spectrum of social justice and human rights issues. In 2023, Deepa was appointed to the Domestic Violence Death Review Committee (DVDRC).

Janet Lee

Janet Lee (BA, BSW, RSW) is the Provincial Director of the Journey Project who is proud to lead a dedicated team of Legal Support Navigators in the quest to strengthen access to justice for survivors in Newfoundland and Labrador Prior to joining Journey, Janet worked community organizing, residential care, and alternative education programs for over fifteen years, focusing her efforts on supporting survivors of gender-based violence in 2014 through her work at End Sexual Violence NL. Janet is passionate about aligning evidence-informed policy with survivor-centred service delivery to better serve the individuals and communities we work with and for.

Jessica Bonilla-Damptey

Jessica Bonilla-Damptey, a Latinx/Indigenous woman from El Salvador, has devoted her life to creating safer communities. As the Executive Director of the Sexual Assault Centre Hamilton & Area (SACHA), she has led numerous initiatives in Hamilton, all of which aim to build a city free of violence and oppression. With a comprehensive educational background from McMaster University as a graduate of the School of Social Work, Indigenous Studies and Health Studies programs, Jessica has forged these academic fields into public service and advocacy work in the not-for-profit sector In addition to her role at SACHA, she holds key positions with the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres (OCRCC), the Woman Abuse Working Group (WAWG), and the Hamilton Anti-Human Trafficking Coalition (HAHTC).

Joanna Birenbaum

Joanna Birenbaum is a litigator with expertise in gender equality and violence against women. Joanna has extensive experience in constitutional litigation, civil sexual assault claims, defending anti-SLAPP malicious prosecution and defamation claims targeting women who have reported violence, and representing women who have experienced harassment and discrimination in employment. Joanna prosecutes, including sexual abuse claims, for a regulated health college in Ontario and supports complainants before other professional discipline bodies. Joanna’s advocacy in this area also includes human rights tribunal claims, university tribunal and Criminal Injuries Compensation Board hearings, and supporting complainants through the criminal justice process. She has been a McMurtry Fellow at Osgoode as well as adjunct faculty at Osgoode teaching Law, Gender, Equality and co-directing Osgoode’s Feminist Legal Advocacy: Ending Violence Against Women clinical program. Joanna has lectured and published in the area of violence against women and women’s equality rights.

Kimberly Mackenzie

Kimberly MacKenzie is the Territorial Nurse Practitioner, Mental Health and Substance Use, for the Northwest Territories. In this role, she works with service users who have complex mental health needs, and combines her frontline work with program and policy development. Kimberly has spent most of her career living and working in remote Northern communities, and she is an advocate for equitable access to healthcare across the Northwest Territories. Kimberly's formal education is in nursing, psychology, social work, and counselling and spirituality, and she draws from these perspectives, as well as her lived experience, to inform a holistic approach to recovery and healing. 

Maggie Fredette

Committed for more than two decades to end violence against women, she works with passion and determination at the CALACS de l'Estrie (Centre d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel), where she worked for 11 years as a service provider, before assuming the position of Director 12 years ago. Her career has been marked by a deep commitment to defending women's rights and improving social and institutional practices in relation to sexual violence. Recognized for her expertise, she was a member of the Expert Committee formed by Minister Sonia LeBel, which aimed to rethink systemic approaches to sexual assault. She is also active in the VOIE committee, a group mandated to review police practices during denunciations to the Sûreté du Québec, thus ensuring a critical and committed look at the justice process. At the same time, she has been president of the board of directors of CIVAS Estrie (Centre d'intervention en violence et agression sexuelle) for more than 5 years, where she continues to put her leadership and experience at the service of the community.

Mandy Tait-Martens

Mandy Tait-Martens is a lifelong resident of Thunder Bay, Ontario. She served as the Executive Director of a street-based Mental Health and Addiction agency in Thunder Bay and surrounding districts for almost ten (10) years. Her career has centred around supporting individuals with complex care needs, concurrent disorders, victim supports, informal counselling and cultural intervention practices. Mandy applies her years of experience- working with street-based populations, program design, development, implementation, and her passion to drive change in communities to her current role as Acting Director of Community Services with Ontario Native Women’s Association to create meaningful change to support healing and wellness.

Naomi Parker

Dr Naomi Parker is the Director of Research for Luna Child and Youth Advocacy Centre (Calgary). She co-leads Kindex, the Research and Knowledge Centre of Canadian Child and Youth Advocacy Centres. Naomi is an Adjunct Assistant Professor with the Faculty of Social Work at the University of Calgary. Naomi boasts many years of experience working in the field of addiction and mental health, ranging from frontline practice to prevention, policy, and research. Naomi has extensive experience in leading community-academic partnerships and conducting policy-relevant research and evaluation. 

Nneka MacGregor

Nneka MacGregor is the co-founder and Executive Director of the Women’s Centre for Social Justice, also known as the WomenatthecentrE, our unique non-profit organization that was created for women survivors of gender-based violence, by women survivors. Nneka develops and delivers training to various agencies and organizations that promote better understanding of the issues, and focuses on personal and political advocacy for women survivors, as well as on ways to engage men and boys in the initiatives to eradicate violence against women.

Pam Hrick

Pam Hrick is the former Executive Director & General Counsel of the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF). Before joining LEAF, she practised law at Stockwoods LLP, maintaining a broad litigation practice, including advising survivors of sexual violence. Pam appeared as counsel or co-counsel at every level of court in Ontario, and at the Federal Court, the Federal Court of Appeal, and the SCC.

Pam has been contributing to the legal community and broader community for years, currently serving as a bencher of the Law Society of Ontario. She also served as Chair of the Board of Management of the 519, a City of Toronto Agency that advocates for 2SLGBTQ+ communities, and Chair of the Canadian Bar Association’s Administrative Law Section.

Pam clerked for Justice Thomas A. Cromwell at the SCC and Justice David Stratas at the Federal Court of Appeal. Pam also served as the Legislative Advisor and Issues Manager to the Attorney General of Ontario. She received her B. Soc. Sci. from the University of Ottawa, her J.D. from Queen’s University, and her LL.M. from New York University.

Rita Acosta

Rita Acosta is Director and Social Programs Officer at the “Mouvement contre le viol et l’inceste or MCVI” (Movement against rape and incest) in Montreal. She has a university education in social intervention (master’s degree in social intervention), as well as a BA in Education. Together with her training in international politics, she has developed the analytical and demanding sense of social policy and advocacy. A committed activist, Rita is dedicated to working for women’s rights. Rita has been with MCVI for 25 years, bringing migrant women to the organization and representation tables. She works specifically on the issue of violence against women and, more particularly, immigrant and refugee women. For the past 10 years, the issue of trafficking migrant women for sexual exploitation has occupied a significant space in Rita’s work at MCVI.

Robert S. Wright

Robert Seymour Wright is a queer, African Nova Scotian Social Worker and Sociologist whose 35-year career has spanned the fields of education, child welfare, forensic mental health, trauma, sexual violence, and cultural competence. He recently completed terms of service as the founding Executive Director of both the Peoples’ Counselling Clinic and the African Nova Scotian Justice Institute and currently continues at the Peoples’ Counselling Clinic as Director Emeritus, Consultant and Therapist. Robert’s identity and work are grounded in his integrated and activist spirituality. 

Tanya Couch

Tanya Couch is a Canadian Armed Forces officer and co-founder of Survivor Safety Matters, an advocacy group she launched with Alexa Barkley to protect the privacy and safety rights of sexual assault survivors. After navigating the criminal justice system herself, she launched House of Commons Petition e-4749 and is working to amend Section 278.1 of the Criminal Code. Tanya also serves as the advisor representing women to the Cadets and Junior Canadian Rangers National Diversity and Inclusion Advisory Group, under the Professional Conduct and Culture Advisor She brings lived experience and a survivor-centred perspective to systemic efforts for reform within both the military and civilian justice systems.

Valérie Auger-Voyer

Valérie Auger-Voyer has 15 years of work experience with non-profits committed to social justice. As the Advocacy Coordinator of the Ending Sexual Violence Association of Canada, Valérie works collaboratively with community-based organizations across the country to advocate for better services, policies and laws for survivors of sexual violence. Her national advocacy work is also informed by her years of experience as a frontline worker with women who experienced violence as well as her time on the Board of the Ottawa Coalition to End Violence Against Women. Valérie is also a Registered Psychotherapist (Qualifying) and holds a master’s in counselling psychology as well as in sociology.

Federal Interdepartmental Consultative Committee

We convened a Federal Interdepartmental Consultative Committee to facilitate information-sharing and coordination across federal departments. This working-level group helped identify relevant federal initiatives and provided updates on efforts to prevent and address sexual violence.

Participating departments included:

We are also grateful to Dr. Denise Preston for her contributions to the military case transfers chapter in this report. Her expertise, deep knowledge and thoughtful analysis have significantly enriched our findings.

Dr. Denise Preston served as Executive Director of the Sexual Misconduct Response Centre at National Defence (2017–2022), where she advanced trauma-informed, restorative, and evidence-based approaches to support and policy development. She previously held senior roles at the Parole Board of Canada and the Correctional Service of Canada, with a 32-year public service career focused on justice, victim rights, and offender rehabilitation.

Dr. Preston holds a Ph.D. in clinical and forensic psychology from Queen’s University and was a licensed psychologist from 1996 to 2022. Since retiring, she has continued to contribute her expertise as a Senior Advisor to the OFOVC and as a board member of a non-profit counselling agency.

Standing Advisory Circles

The OFOVC also drew on the expertise of its three ongoing advisory circles, which provided ongoing feedback and support throughout the investigation.

Myths and Stereotypes

Since the 1990s, the SCC has addressed the improper use of rape myths and stereotypes in sexual assault trials, recognizing their harmful effects on survivors and judicial outcomes.

    “A number of rape myths have in the past improperly formed the background for considering evidentiary issues in sexual     assault trials. These include the false concepts that: women cannot be raped against their will; only ‘bad girls’ are raped;     anyone not clearly of ‘good character’ is more likely to have consented.”[24]

    “The woman who comes to the attention of the authorities has her victimization measured against the current rape     mythologies, i.e., who she should be in order to be recognized as having been, in the eyes of the law, raped; who her attacker     must be in order to be recognized, in the eyes of the law, as a potential rapist; and how injured she must be in order to be     believed. If her victimization does not fit the myths, it is unlikely that an arrest will be made or a conviction obtained. As     prosecutors and police often suggest, in an attempt to excuse their application of stereotype, there is no point in directing     cases toward the justice system if juries and judges will acquit on the basis of their stereotypical perceptions of the ‘supposed     victim’ and her ‘supposed’ victimization.”[25]

    “In considering the lack of evidence of the complainant’s avoidance of the appellant, the trial judge committed the very error     he had earlier in his reasons instructed himself against: he judged the complainant’s credibility based solely on the     correspondence between her behaviour and the expected behaviour of the stereotypical victim of sexual assault. This     constituted an error of law.”[26]

These myths and stereotypes about child and adult complainants are particularly harmful because they wrongly comprise “common sense” and the “reasonable person” test that are the basis for many social comparisons or legal decisions. Their pervasiveness and subtlety create the risk that survivors will be blamed, ignored, or unjustly discredited in the minds of police, service providers, judges and jurors, policymakers, and decision-makers.[27]

Facts about sexual assault

Most sexual assaults occur between people who are known to each other.[28] It is fundamentally a crime of power and control, and the presence of pre-existing relationships or familiarity, should not diminish its severity or influence the appropriate response. This fact is foundational to our investigation.

Women and girls remain the primary targets and victims of sexual violence in Canada and globally.[29] Importantly, there is no single or ‘typical’ way that a survivor of sexual violence behaves during or after an assault.[30]

Sex-based stereotypes and myths

In 1991, the SCC [31] described the “twin myths” of sexual assault:

The continued prevalence of the twin myths is indisputable. Survivors encounter them from friends, family, professional networks, law enforcement, Crown prosecutors, defence lawyers, and judges.

Survivors of sexual assault may commonly:[32]

  • freeze
  • not say "no" clearly to unwanted sexual contact
  • exhibit no apparent emotional expression following a sexual assault
  • be unable to identify the perpetrator to police
  • provide seemingly inconsistent statements
  • deny or minimize the assault
  • blame themselves for the assault
  • maintain relationships with the perpetrator after the assault
  • struggle with decision-making
  • delay or avoid reporting
  • exhibit memory gaps or inconsistencies
  • recant the experience
 

 

Sex-based stereotypes are frequently used, overtly or unconsciously, in assessing the credibility of a survivor.[33] “Some of the most common ways that victims react to sexual assault are precisely what people often have difficulty understanding.”[34] Common and entirely natural survivor reactions, such as freezing, delayed reporting, memory inconsistencies, emotional numbness, or maintaining relationships with perpetrators, are misunderstood as credibility issues rather than typical and predictable responses to trauma.

These misconceptions are so frequent in legal proceedings that the National Judicial Institute explicitly instructs judges to inform juries in sexual assault trials that “Silence does not constitute consent. Nor does submission or lack of resistance.” [35]

Discriminatory stereotypes have been used in so-called “rough sex” defences, subjecting survivors to humiliating cross-examination questions, such as whether they “enjoyed” violent acts.[36] We heard that violent sexual acts are projected on screens in the courtroom and paused while the survivor is asked questions about whether she was enjoying herself.[37]

Male survivors

Myths profoundly affect male survivors, significantly contributing to underreporting.[38] 68% of men who experienced childhood sexual abuse and 70% who experienced adult sexual abuse/assault did not report it.[39] The vast majority of men who sexually assault other men or boys are heterosexual.[40]

Male survivors are affected by stereotypes about male strength, control and power, sexuality, and virility in their interactions with justice systems.

Programs and services for male survivors are much more limited – which creates a vicious circle with reduced reporting, funding, research, and understanding by service providers, decision-makers, and policymakers.

The Association of Alberta Sexual Assault Services identifies common myths about male survivors, including:

 

VIDEO: Survivors of Sexual Trauma Reveal an Important Truth [5:47] [42]

Content Warning: Video includes descriptions of sexual assault.

Boys are told, “man up,” “don’t cry,” and “tough it out.”

Two-spirit lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and others ( 2SLGBTQIA+) survivors

People who are sexual and gender minorities are disproportionately affected by sexual violence. Studies show that  2SLGBTQIA+ people are three times more likely than heterosexual people to be survivors of violent crime, including sexual violence.[43] A much smaller portion are crimes that happen within an intimate relationship.[44]

Across all parts of daily life - in public, online, and at work - 2SLGBTQIA+ people are more likely to experience inappropriate sexual behaviours[45] Despite this reality, myths and stereotypes continue to undermine public understanding of their experiences and access to support.

 2SLGBTQIA+ people face both traditional rape myths like victim blaming and disbelief, alongside a second layer rooted in anti- 2SLGBTQIA+ bias. Recent research highlights how these modern rape myths reflect persistent biases rooted in heteronormative assumptions, gender stereotypes, and widespread misconceptions about LGBTQ experiences of sexual violence.[46] These include false and harmful beliefs such as:

Survivors with disabilities

People with disabilities are diverse, encompassing both visible disabilities such as mobility impairments and invisible disabilities, including intellectual and cognitive conditions. Disability affects people across all demographics, but women with disabilities are particularly vulnerable to sexual violence. Research shows that women labelled with cognitive disabilities are four times more likely to be sexually assaulted than women without disabilities, and thirty times more likely than men without disabilities.[47]

Despite this heightened risk, rape myths and stereotypes continue to shape how survivors of sexual violence with disabilities are perceived and treated. Harmful assumptions, such as the belief that people with disabilities are either asexual or sexually hyperactive, or that they are unreliable witnesses, can undermine their credibility and access to justice.

People with disabilities are disproportionately subjected to sexual violence.[48] For many disabled survivors, reporting violence poses additional risks – they may be dependent on others for personal care, housing, income, companionship, and access to community or services.

Why this matters

These pervasive myths and stereotypes significantly harm survivors by undermining their access to justice, safety, and healing. Myths and stereotypes can reinforce stigma, silence survivors, and perpetuate systemic inequalities, for example, by:

Despite the Supreme Court’s clear and unequivocal direction that correct and reasonable decisions on sexual violence offences cannot be based on myths and stereotypes, we heard that myths and stereotypes remain pervasive in the criminal justice system. Annex B identifies specific myths and stereotypes that have been discredited by Canadian courts.

Endnotes

[1] On more than one occasion during consultation tables, participating stakeholders referenced this quote to express concerns about how challenges persist despite years of changes to legislation.

[2] The “brings the administration of justice in disrepute” is a phrase used in Canadian law. Its purpose is to protect the integrity and reputation of the justice system. In the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it asks whether an action in the justice system (such as admitting or excluding evidence), would harm the justice system’s reputation in the eyes of an objective reasonable person. Government of Canada, Department of Justice (July 14, 2025). Charterpedia - Section 24(2) – Exclusion of evidence.

[3] Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, S.C. 2015, c. 13, s. 2.

[4] Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, S.C. 2015, c. 13, ss. 18–19.

[5] Canada, WAGE. (2024, December 4). Facts, stats and WAGE’s impact: Gender-based violence. Canada.ca.

[6] Canada, WAGE. (2024, December 4). Facts, stats and WAGE’s impact: Gender-based violence. Canada.ca.

[7] McDonald, S., Tijerino, A., & Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada. (2013). Male survivors of sexual abuse and assault: their experiences.

[8] Terms and Conditions of Employment of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime, SOR/2007-54, retrieved
on 2025-08-18

[9] P.C. 2007-0355, March 15, 2007, para. 9(4).

[10] SISSA Written Submission #01

[11] A letter was sent to the Prime Minister, Minister of Justice, Minister of Public Safety, Minister of WAGE, and Minister of National Defence.

[12] R v. Jordan, 2016 SCC 27 (CanLII), [2016] 1 SCR 631

[13] Ireton, J., & Ouellet, V. (2025, February 3). Hundreds of stayed sexual assault cases send chilling message to victims, advocates warn. CBC.

[14] Landmark lawsuit launched by survivors of violence calls for changes to justice system – Marshall Law. (2025, April 1).

[15] Bill S-12 codified the process for revoking or modifying a publication ban. Bill S‑12, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Sex Offender Information Registration Act and the International Transfer of Offenders Act, 1st Sess., 44th Parl., 2023 (Can.).

[16] Landmark lawsuit launched by survivors of violence calls for changes to justice system – Marshall Law. (2025, April 1).

[17] Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, S.C. 2015, c. 13 (Can.).

[18] Emphasis added.

[19] Canadian Council of Parliamentary Ombudsman. (2022). Fairness by Design: An administrative fairness assessment guide.

[20] Semi-structured interviews were based on Melissa DeJonckheere and Lisa M Vaughn’s (2019) semi structured interviewing practices for primary care research which focuses on flexible, exploratory, detailed experiences and communication strategies for interviews. DeJonckheere, M., & Vaughn, L. M. (2019). Semistructured interviewing in primary care research: a balance of relationship and rigour. Family Medicine and Community Health, 7(2), e000057. https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2018-000057

[21] The survivor survey was open from November 2024 to March 2025.

[22] From October 2024 to January 2025

[23] This includes sections 1, 2, 7, 8, 11, 15, 24 and 28.

[24] R v. Osolin, 1993 CanLII 54 (SCC), at para 670. See also Seaboyer, [1991 CanLII 76 (SCC); R v. Osolin, 1993 CanLII 54 (SCC) at pp. 669-71; R v. Ewanchuk, 1999 CanLII 711 (SCC) at paras. 94-97. 

[25] R v. Seaboyer; R v. Gayme, [1991] 2 SCR 577.

[26] R v. A.R.J.D., 2018 SCC 6 (CanLII), at para 2; emphasis added

[27] R v. Find (2001) 1 SCC 863 at paras 101-103. (McLachlin CJC)

[28] Sexual Assault & Harassment | Violence prevention | Canadian Women’s Foundation. (2022, November 22). Canadian Women’s Foundation.

[29] Cotter, A. & Canadian Centre for Justice and Community Safety Statistics. (2021). Criminal victimization in Canada, 2019. Government of Canada, Statistics Canada.

[30] R v. D.D., 2000 SCC 43, at para. 65.

[31] R v. Seaboyer; R v. Gayme, [1991] 2 SCR 577.

[32] Haskell, L., C. Psych., & Randall, M. (2019). The impact of trauma on adult sexual assault victims. In Justice Canada, Justice Canada.

[33] Haskell, L., C. Psych., & Randall, M. (2019). The impact of trauma on adult sexual assault victims. In Justice Canada, Justice Canada.

[34] Haskell, L., C. Psych., & Randall, M. (2019). The impact of trauma on adult sexual assault victims. In Justice Canada, Justice Canada.

[35] National Judicial Institute. (2019). Model Jury Instructions: Offence 271: Sexual Assault.

[36] Sheehy, E., Grant, I., & Gotell, L. (2023). Resurrecting “She Asked for It”: The Rough Sex Defence in Canadian Courts. Alberta Law Review, 60(3).

[37] SISSA Survivor Interview #198

[38] Association of Alberta Sexual Assault Services. (2022). Fact Sheet: Debunking popular misconceptions about men and sexual violence.

[39] Government of Canada, Department of Justice. (2023, May 18). The impact of trauma on adult sexual assault victims.

[40] SISSA Written Submission #07

[41] SISSA Survivor Interview #163

[42] SISSA Survivor Interview #37

[43] SISSA Survivor Interview #108

[44] SISSA Survivor Interview #85

[45] SISSA Survivor Interview #2

[46] SISSA Written Submission #11

[47] SISSA Survivor Interview #180

[48] SISSA Survivor Interview #12

Page details

2025-11-19