In celebration of 2023 Law Day, CREATE Justice, with the Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science and Justice Studies, announced the release of the final reports of the Legal Data Scan and Needs Assessment (the reports). The reports are the first of its kind in Saskatchewan, made possible through the support of the Law Foundation of Saskatchewan and the Law Society of Saskatchewan. Over 270 lawyers completed the Lawyer Survey associated with the Legal Needs Assessment, invaluably contributing to Saskatchewan’s legal data. A key objective of conducting the survey was to recognize the unique perspectives that lawyers – alongside community organization and public feedback – have about their community’s needs to improve access to justice.
The purpose of the reports are as follows:
- The Legal Data Scan (LDS): scans existing justice data being collected by legal and non-legal organizations in Saskatchewan to determine the usability of that data to identify gaps in the justice system, inform service delivery, improve access to justice, and establish a data commons. View the Legal Data Scan Report here.
- The Legal Needs Assessment (LNA): captures lawyers’ and legal and non-legal service providers’ perceptions of access to justice issues and legal needs within communities across Saskatchewan, and intends to compliment and bolster user-centered information on access to justice issues and legal needs, sourced through national- and provincial-level surveys (e.g., the Canadian Legal Problems Survey, 2021, conducted by Statistics Canada on behalf of the Department of Justice Canada). View the Legal Needs Assessment Report here.
Lawyers’ Perceptions of Justice-Related Problems and Legal Needs
The identified priority areas and broader findings from the reports will be useful to a variety of stakeholders in informing justice system improvements, including lawyers. Lawyers provided great insight into their role in the community and the work they do throughout the reports. They provided their perceptions regarding legal needs, barriers to access to justice, and what they viewed as potential solutions. Within the report, there were a few notable differences in perception of legal needs between lawyers and community-based organizations. For example, one interesting finding from the LNA outlined the two groups different perceptions on Saskatchewan residents’ ability to obtain legal assistance and reach resolution:
Reflecting upon the community in which they serve and the work they do, lawyers generally suggested that some barriers may exist with respect to individuals and communities in Saskatchewan being able to navigate their justice-related problems and meet their legal needs. However, unlike representatives of community-based organizations, lawyers generally believed that people faced with a justice-related problem are able to obtain the legal advice, information, and representation they need, as well as address their problems in a timely manner and satisfactorily resolve them. (at ix-x, LNA).
This is one finding that could prompt lawyers’ further investigation into unmet needs detailed in the report that could represent opportunities for expanded or new service delivery options. Other information throughout the reports further demonstrates potential for data-driven changes to legal policy and service delivery. Many lawyers were open to finding new, innovative solutions and points of facilitation outside of the formal legal system:
Just over one-third of lawyers (34%) neither agreed nor disagreed that people experiencing a justice-related problem are better off addressing it through the formal legal system (roughly 24% agreed and 26% disagreed). Many lawyers further agreed (41%) or strongly agreed (16%) that the vast majority of justice-related problems could be resolved outside of the formal legal system (17% neither agreed nor disagreed and 21% disagreed). (at 64, LNA).
By the Numbers: Areas of Greatest Need & Social Groups Served
Beyond general perceptions, lawyers were asked questions about legal needs they identified from their work and practice. The lawyers who participated in the survey were asked to “identify up to three areas of law they believe are in demand but not adequately offered in their community” (at xi, LNA). The top five areas of law that were most endorsed included:
- Family (43%)
- Criminal (32%)
- Immigration/refugee (20%)
- Housing/residential tenancies (20%)
- Aboriginal/Indigenous (13%) (at xi, LNA)
Lawyers were then asked, based on the one area of law they believed was most in demand but not adequately offered, follow-up questions about potential barriers to accessing this particular area of law and potential solutions for increasing accessibility. For example, regarding facilitating access to family law, one lawyer suggested “This service needs to be much more integrated with non-legal supports (i.e. mental health, addictions, counselling, housing, etc.). Clients are not set up for success when they’re also dealing with many other issues resulting from or contributing to marital breakdown” (at 71, LNA).
Lawyers were also asked to “identify up to three social groups they believed were in need of legal support(s) but are not being adequately served in their community” (at xiv, LNA). The top five social groups included:
- Low-income earners (42%)
- Indigenous peoples (23%)
- Persons with mental illness (22%)
- Unemployed/economically inactive persons (21%)
- Immigrants/newcomers/refugees (17%) (at xiv, LNA).
From there, lawyers were asked what social group they believed was most in need of legal services, but not being adequately served. Follow up questions asked lawyers to identify barriers these communities face. One group that generated much discussion was that of low-income earners who do not qualify for free or reduced cost legal services. One lawyer stated that “legal aid is available to some low-earners, it is not available to all” and another added that “the work is often too complex to do for the resources which clients can pay” (at 96, LNA). Another argued that while legal clinics are a great option, they can leave clients “without someone to attend court” and represent them (at 96, LNA). However, some alternatives to costly legal fees were suggested. For example, one lawyer proposed that resources are directed to help low-income earners “obtain legal, collaborative or mediation services” (at 96, LNA) and another suggest a potential government subsidy to give low-income earners “access [to a] collaborative process” (at 98, LNA).
Closing
CREATE Justice invites ongoing conversation about the priority areas, broader findings, and thoughts on next steps for collaborative action supported by findings from the reports. Please email us at createjustice@usask.ca with any questions, comments, or ideas related to the reports, and how you or your firm/organization would like to be part of the next decade of change in Saskatchewan.
Interested in learning more about the report findings? Check out the recording of the CPD-accredited session on “Results from the Saskatchewan Legal Needs Assessment”, which took place October 24, 2023 (12:00-1:00 PM) during the 8th annual Saskatchewan Access to Justice Week. View here: https://vimeo.com/911695165/86590441b3?share=copy.
Stephanie Varsanyi, Student Research Assistant, Brea Lowenberger, & Heather Heavin, CREATE Justice, College of Law, University of Saskatchewan, in collaboration with Dr. Lisa Jewell & Dr. Bryce Stoliker, Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science and Justice Studies.