My book Ethics on Trial – Protecting Humans in Canada’s Broken Research System began with a simple, haunting question: “Who protects those who participate in research in Canada?” Most Canadians assume the answer is obvious – that someone, somewhere, must be ensuring people aren’t harmed or exploited in the name of science. But after more than thirty years in this field, I can tell you: that assumption is dangerously wrong.I’ve heard and personally witnessed too many tragedies that never made the news. Stories of people whose lives were shattered by their participation in research – not because of science itself, but because the system that was supposed to protect them wasn’t really a system at all.Henri was one of those people. At 75 years old, research staff still deemed him “healthy” enough to take part in a clinical trial. Ten days later, he collapsed and died.Leticia’s story is different, but no less troubling. She survived her study, but the emotional and psychological injuries she endured changed her life forever.Baptiste, a young man at the centre of a tuberculosis outbreak at a Montreal research facility, suffered harms that were the direct result of neglect and inadequate safeguards.And in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Indigenous children were drawn into a research study that should never have been approved - one that left them exploited and re-traumatized.Together, these stories reveal the same painful truth: the rights, safety, and welfare of research participants in Canada are far too often left unprotected. Their suffering is not a random misfortune but a symptom of a broken system of governance - one without binding standards, independent oversight, or real consequences when protections fail. And until we confront that truth, more people will be put at risk.Why hasn’t this been fixed? In large part, because of bureaucratic territorialism. For decades, efforts to introduce a robust system of ethical research governance in Canada have been blocked by individuals more interested in protecting turf than protecting people. Using their positions of power and influence, they argued against a better system of governance by falsely attributing proper oversight and accountability to red tape and needless bureaucracy.Ethics on Trial makes the case for good and ethical governance through human research accreditation. Accreditation objectively strengthens the programs that protect research participants. It is quality. It is accountability. It is what makes trust in research possible.If Ethics on Trial gives one research participant or family member the courage to ask hard questions, especially when it’s inconvenient… if it makes one policymaker think twice before endorsing a broken model… if it helps one institution choose integrity over expediency - then it will have been worth every word.— Janice E. Parente, PhD