Times have changed and a prediction that we made last year is quickly coming true. Many of our regular readers have asked, how tenable is the IRP scheme? We suggested that the IRP scheme might not fall away in dramatic fashion with a big court case. Instead, we suggested, by chipping it away we could make it crumble. It will collapse, we suggested, when the number of people succeeding on review of their IRP becomes so significant that it is then readily obvious that the scheme has failed.
You’ll recall that news stories in August 2013 spoke of 20% of people succeeding when they appeal their IRP. Those statistics were already a few months old because they came from the publication of our Freedom of Information requests from earlier in the year. We estimate that we were succeeding in approximately 35% of all 90-day IRP review hearings from that period.
In September 2013 we looked back on our stats for August and we approximate our success rate as 43%. And we bettered that in September.
It’s important to remember that the IRP scheme was designed so no one would win. When people succeed, it undermines the concept of immediate punishment. How tenable is the IRP scheme if 43% of the people we defend have their IRP lifted despite having already suffered 3 weeks of a driving prohibition and terrible costs? Answer: It’s not.
With the IRP scheme, the Government punishes innocent people and puts the onus on each individual innocent person to prove their innocence. This is untenable.
Our expectation for March 2014, is that we will be successful in over 75% of the review decisions we receive. We come to that extrapolating on the IRP appeal decisions we’ve received back so far this month. Compare that to the overall win rate of 10% in August 2011, and it tells you that there is a significant problem.
When lots of people are innocent, immediate punishment is untenable. How tenable is the IRP scheme? It’s not.
Wilson & Richardson update
Two key BC Supreme Court decisions are being appealed to the BC Court of Appeal. The issue is the same in both cases, and we’ve discussed them at length on our blog.
The appeal in Wilson is being heard in the BC Court of Appeal in Kamloops this week.
From what we can surmise, the Justice Ministry made the strategic decision to argue the two decisions separately despite the issue being the same in the two cases. They intend to argue that Richardson adds nothing and simply follows Wilson. Then they hope to persuade the Court that Wilson is wrong. And they will try to call Richardson into question by pointing out that it too is under appeal.
There are a few problems with this strategy. In Richardson the Court carefully considered the legal principals and judicial decisions, and the wording of the Motor Vehicle Act without significant reference to Wilson. It’s clear that it was a decision made independent or irrespective of Wilson. Regardless, however, the Wilson decision is correct.
Wilson and Richardson are the law and that’s not likely to change. It may be months before we have a decision from the Court of Appeal. Right now our concern is that the Government isn’t following the law. That concerns us because it undermines the respect people have for the justice system.
When the Government doesn’t apply the law so the Government can improperly punish people, then we all live in fear. It brings to mind a totalitarian police state.
Don’t worry. They haven’t shut us down yet.