Chief Justice Robert Bauman – The Justice Hack – Voices of Justice Magazine 2021

What has been the impact of Access to
Justice BC’s Triple Aim, and what are
some projects that may have followed the
Triple Aim template?
The Triple Aim is a reflection of my belief
that words matter, and common vision
matters. It’s easy to be cynical and say,
“Well, those are just words. That’s the
vision, where’s the reality?” And we hear
that, but the fact is that a common vision,
which people can rally around, is an
extremely important concept, an extremely
important development and extremely
important accomplishment. That’s what the
Triple Aim is. It’s something that over 50
justice organizations and individuals have
subscribed to as being a common vision of
ways of improving the system and what we
want to see in a justice system.
A lot of our progress so far has been
consciousness raising, momentum building.
We haven’t resolved the access to justice
challenge in British Columbia and Canada by
any means. Some would say we’re not being
very quick and doing so at all. I hear that,
but the fact is, we built I think a momentum
in this province around a vision for action in
this area. We’ve also created measurement
techniques for determining if we are
making progress. It provides for common
measurement, which, of course, is critical,
so that we’re always comparing apples and
apples.
What is the significance of Access to
Justice BC’s four pillars (being usercentred,
collaborative, experimental and
evidence-based)?
They really say it all. I think the usercentred
aspect of our vision is probably the
most important, because it takes away the
traditional view that judges and lawyers are
what matter in this system, and therein lies
the hope for reform. It turns that on its head,
as it should be, to concentrate on who we’re
all working for, and that is the people who
use our system. And to the extent our system
isn’t comfortable for those who use it, we
failed; isn’t accessible for those who use it,
we failed.
Evidence-based is important. Experimental
also is a critical core for me. That is a
willingness to say to ourselves, “Our
existing efforts are wanting, they are not
answering the challenge, at least in the 21st
century.” We have to be prepared to test
new initiatives, we have to be willing to
open ourselves up to experimenting in areas
where our innate conservatism is challenged.
I’m as conservative as anybody else in this
profession. I value the oldest institutions
as much as anybody else does. But I also
recognize that unless we are open to new
ideas – and some of them will be radical and
disruptive – we’re bound to simply repeat
our mistakes in the past.
What do you think is the most important
next step for the profession in terms of
increasing access to justice?
I think awareness of the problem is step one.
Everyone knows that there is a problem.
A willingness to be part of the solution,
as opposed to simply acknowledging the
problem and moving on to our daily lives,
comes next. There are lots of comfortable
pews in the legal profession where you can
practice your entire life without worrying
about any of these problems.
But the fact is, I think lawyers are generally
starting to become aware of the problem,
and willing to become part of the solution. A
willingness to try something new is critical.
Disruptors prompt our imagination – the
people who say, “Why not? Or what if?” as
opposed to, “That’s not the way we do things.”