Photo: Kuldeep Kaur Ahluwalia fought a 10-year long legal battle for her abuse to be recognized under family law. (Image provided by Kuldeep Kaur Ahluwalia.)
By: Aadya Arora
Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
New Canadian Media
“The Court specifically acknowledged that immigrant women can be particularly vulnerable because of … isolation and dependence,” Kuldeep Kaur Ahluwalia, the woman at the centre of a recent historic Supreme Court verdict, has told New Canadian Media in an exclusive interview.
On May 15, the Supreme Court declared a new tort (a civil wrong) of family violence in a ruling in the Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia case. The tort considers intimate partner violence (IPV) a civil wrong which harms the dignity and autonomy of an individual and impacts their equality in a relationship, making the abuser liable to pay monetary damages.
“It may also include conduct such as isolation, humiliation, surveillance, financial control, sexual coercion, and intimidation,” the court said in its judgement.
Kuldeep Kaur Ahluwalia, a racialized woman from the Indian state of Punjab, was married to Amritpal Singh Ahluwalia for 16 years. They met and got married in India in 1999, before moving to Canada in the early 2000s. The couple had two children together.
“The abuse started in India just a few days after marriage and it continued after coming to Canada. Nothing changed or got better — rather it increased. In India, at least I had some family nearby, even if I couldn’t tell them everything. In Canada, I was completely alone. I didn’t know anyone. I didn’t know the system. That isolation made everything worse. He became more controlling, and I had nowhere to turn,” Kuldeep said in an interview conducted over email through her lawyer, Angela Pagano.
“Silent treatment”
The court acknowledged that Kuldeep was not allowed to pursue higher education or employment, given “silent treatment” for months by Amritpal until she complied. “The husband abused the wife over their entire 16-year marriage. The abusive conduct was sustained and varied in character. It included physical assaults, humiliation, intimidation, and conduct intending to inflict emotional distress; it extended to isolation of the wife from family members, mistreatment as a means of pressure for sex, and financial control. The husband’s conduct had coerced and controlled the wife in order to break her will and condition her to obey him from the beginning of their marriage,” the court found.
“She’s so brave to be at this for a decade and we honestly were indebted to her for, number one, being a survivor and then, secondly, putting herself on the line to make this happen,” said Jessie Lehail, CEO of Kaur Collective Foundation, an organization that unites Sikh women online.
Amritpal Singh Ahluwalia filed for divorce in 2016 and the court hearings took place over 11 days in 2022. The former was represented by counsel while Kuldeep was self-represented. Justice Renu Mandhane of the Ontario Supreme Court of Justice ruled in favour of a new tort to cover family violence: “On the rare and unusual facts before me, [Kuldeep] is entitled to a remedy in tort that properly accounts for the extreme breach of trust occasioned by violence, and that brings some degree of personal accountability to his conduct.”
Amritpal Singh Ahluwalia and his lawyer contended that Kuldeep’s “focus is on TFV [tort of family violence] as an instrument of public policy and symbolism, rather than the legal framework for the evolution of the common law. It is unrealistic to expect a tort to ‘solve’ intimate partner violence.”
Justice Mandhane awarded Kuldeep $50,000 in punitive damages under the new tort in addition to $100,000 for compensatory and aggravated damages. The $50,000 for punitive damages were later reduced by the Ontario Court of Appeal.
The Supreme Court, on May 15, called intimate partner violence an epidemic, but some judges on the panel questioned the need for a new tort to remedy the problem.
“[The judges] agreed that there should be this new tort because of the special unique nature of intimate partner violence and relationships that are spousal,” said Raji Mangat, a lawyer and board member of the SALAL Sexual Violence Support Centre.
The Supreme Court appeared to take a more trauma-informed approach towards helping victims fleeing abuse. “The tendency to frame intimate partner violence as episodic or incident-based sometimes fails to speak to the cumulative pattern of conduct that is greater than the sum of its parts.” the court wrote in its judgement.
Cultural complexities in the Ahluwalia case
Kuldeep told NCM that abuse is normalized in her cultural community.
“In my experience, many women become used to the abuse and over time it starts to feel normal to them, especially when they lack confidence and support from their own families. Women in our culture are taught to obey their spouse — “Banda hai, gussa aa hi jaata hai, ek dou lagaa bhi diye tou kay hua, bandoon mein ego tou hoti hi hai — tum chup raha karo”. (He is a man, he gets angry, if he slapped you once or twice, what is the big deal, men have egos, you should remain silent). Moreover, many women from our culture do not speak openly because they fear social stigma, honour, rejection from the family and surroundings.”
Kuldeep said she never considered leaving the marriage, but when he threatened to leave her the third time, that was when she did not beg him to stay. She still left coming back as an option for him if he chose to return.
“Firstly, I didn’t have much support from my own family — I had been conditioned to stay quiet, to adjust. Breaking a marriage is considered taboo — “log kya kaheyingey, hum kya muh dikhaayeingey, hmaari badnaami hogi” (What will people say, how will we show our face to people, we will be disgraced).”
Jessie Lehail also spoke about shame being associated with divorce.
“There’s a lot of shame when women leave marriages. Their divorce is still looked down upon,” she said. “There’s a lack of understanding. particularly if the abuse is not physical abuse, but it’s coercive control, financial abuse, technology abuse. Like all of these things that are a bit more invisible, that there’s still a lack of understanding in the South Asian community specifically, a downplaying … if the marks aren’t visible, you’re okay.”
Fear of being judged
The Supreme Court judgement acknowledges the gendered nature of the violence stating that “women are overwhelmingly those most often harmed by their partners” which causes “distinct harm because it violates aspects of the right to dignity, autonomy, and equality to which women are entitled in their intimate partnerships.” Further, the court acknowledged that “Indigenous, racialized, and disabled women, as well as persons from sexual minority communities” are at higher risk of coercive control in intimate partner relationships.
The Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia case shows how dislocation and isolation puts immigrant women more at risk.
“I didn’t have my family around me, I didn’t know the system, and I had no one to turn to. That isolation made it easier for him to control me — financially, emotionally, in every way … for immigrant women, the barriers are even higher. Many don’t speak the language, don’t know about services, don’t have support networks, and are financially dependent on their spouse,” said Kuldeep.
Kuldeep also said that one of the reasons she never looked for resources to leave the marriage was because she “was neither financially independent nor felt mentally strong enough to leave. The fear of being judged, and not being taken seriously kept me silent for years before I finally spoke up.”
Kuldeep, who lives in Brampton, ON, an area with a large South Asian, particularly Punjabi population, asserts that she is aware of many women in the area who stay in abusive relationships even when they are financially independent.
“I feel it needs courage to speak out, not just money. Many women hold back because of concerns about their families, their reputation, and the fear of being singled out. They often worry about their children and being blamed for the breakdown of family relationships.”
Compensation as insufficient remedy
Kuldeep said that the value of the court’s judgement “isn’t just about compensation, but recognition.” However, she said it can be common to not receive compensation in immigrant relationships.
“It is also quite common in many immigrant/racialized marriages for one spouse to have an informal job or profession, but still expect their partner — most often the wife — to be in a stable profession, with benefits etc. (with the expectation that the other spouse — most often the husband — will nevertheless control all the family’s income and spending),” said Kuldeep.
Culture plays a role in this as well, as abusers can find ways to hide their assets and earnings.
“Their spouses may become more inclined to conceal their assets and take steps to hide their finances. Many women have told me that hiding or transferring money through family and friends is common in many of our cultures,” Kuldeep said.
“At the end of the day, while there may not always be significant funds available for the purposes of compensation, this should not prevent women from telling their stories and seeking redress from the courts.”
Kuldeep said her first point of support was talking to her family doctor who referred her to social workers and community organizations, and then one of her friends drove her there.
“There is a lot of information available for those seeking help if they can find the right resources. But there are so many organizations in the system, and it can make the process hard to navigate. Reaching out to the right person and the right services at the initial stage is the most important step. I was fortunate to have had the help of counselling, doctors, and nurses at the initial stage,” Kuldeep said in the interview.
“They see you as a person, not a problem.”
She also said that what helped her most was her mother’s support a month after the divorce was filed.
“That was the first time she truly listened to me and told me that if the abuse continued, she would support me in my decision. That one sentence changed my life.”
But the lack of resources for immigrant women is apparent.
Awareness can be created through sharing stories, listening to the sufferers and building trust within communities. Although attitudes are gradually changing across generations, a large number of women still need support and encouragement.”
Despite the challenges, Kuldeep is optimistic about the consequences of the new tort.
“And now there is a legal way to hold abusers accountable for that whole pattern of abuse, not just individual incidents. I hope this decision gives courage to other immigrant women to speak up, knowing that the law now understands what they have experienced.”