The Judicial Council of Canada says it is reviewing a lawsuit against a judge who recently ruled that a former Regina doctor was not guilty of sexually assaulting several patients.
The complaint was filed on June 8 by one of five women who had accused Sylvester Ukabam of improperly touching them during medical examinations.
Last month, Queen’s Court Judge Brian Scherman acquitted Ukabam of seven counts of sexual assault between 2010 and 2017.
The judge said in his written decision that the women were wrong about what they felt.
The woman who filed the complaint had accused Sylvester of penetrating her vagina during a colonoscopy. She said the judge’s decision reflects an underlying attitude of ignorance, misogyny and gender bias that she says is deeply disturbing.
“She was misrepresenting our anatomy,” she said in an interview with The Canadian Press.
“A judge would not have thought of this ridiculous argument, and if one of the victims had been a man, she would never have questioned it.”
The woman cannot be named due to a publication ban.
In his ruling, Scherman said the case boiled down to the reliability of the evidence and found no reason not to believe in Ukabam, which was “logical and consistent” in his testimony.
“His medical justifications, or explanations of what would have happened and why, were in the context of the Crown’s own expert testimony,” the judge said in his ruling.
Dr. Barry Lumb, a gastroenterologist, had testified at trial that the drugs women received during their medical procedures could affect memory and that women could feel deep pain in the pelvic area during rectal exams.
The woman wrote in her complaint that because she has a female anatomy, her testimony was considered lacking in credibility.
“Women‘ mixing ’our vagina with our rectum is as ridiculous a concept as that of men confusing their penis with their rectum,” she said.
“I firmly believe that this judge would not have questioned a man’s ability to differentiate his genitals from his rectum. Because we are women, however, the judge accepted this ridiculous argument as reasonable.”
The Saskatchewan Courts website says Scherman took supernumerary status last year, which means he hears a small number of cases. A spokeswoman for the provincial judges said Scherman declined to comment on the complaint.
The lawsuit against Scherman was filed days before the Crown appealed the decision.
The Crown argues in its notice of appeal that the judge erred in dismissing his application to admit evidence of similar facts, disregarded all of the evidence, and speculated on issues that did not evidence.
Ukabam’s lawyer said he would file a cross-appeal.
“In light of the trial judge’s evidence and findings, we are disappointed that the Crown has chosen to appeal,” Aaron Fox said last week.
The complainant said she wrote to the court before learning that an appeal was being lodged.
She said that as a mother of daughters, it was important for her to speak. And he wants women who allege sexual assault to be able to “testify in a room that is presided over impartially, regardless of gender.”
A spokesman for the judicial council said the review would take between three and six months.