1. No category

QUID
NOVI
Journal des étudiant-e-s
en droit de l’université McGill
Published by the McGill Law
Students’ Association
Volume 36, no 14
10 fevrier 2015 | February 10, 2015
QUID
NOVI
QUID NOVI
3644 Peel Street
Montréal, Québec H2A 1X1
[email protected]
http://quid.mcgill.ca/
http://www.quidnovi.ca
EDITORS IN CHIEF
Melissa Cederqvist
Ying Cheng
Nathan Cudicio
IN-HOUSE DIVA EMERITUS
Charlie Feldman
Journal des étudiant-e-s
en droit de l’université McGill
McGill Law’s Weekly Student Newspaper
Volume 36, no 14
10 fevrier 2015 | February 10, 2015
What’s inside ?
Quel est le contenu ?
ÉDITO3
A LITTLE WORD FROM YOUR VP ACADEMIC 4
REFLECTIONS ON CURRICULAR REFORM
5
SPEED-MEET FÉMINISTE: WHO IS IN CHARGE? 7
OTTAWA MUST NOW DRAFT AN ASSISTED-SUICIDE LAW.
10
RIGHT TO DIE MAY BE A FLEETING VICTORY
11
THE NOT CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE REFORM ACT
12
TORTS AND TARTS/DÉLITS-CIEUX
15
FROM THE DESK OF THE IN-HOUSE DIVA
17
LAYOUT EDITORS
Fortunat Nadima
Sunny Yang
ASSOCIATE REVIEWERS
Pouneh Davar-Ardakani
Kaishan He
Lindsay Little
Elspeth McMurray
Samantha Rudolph
David Searle
Andrew Stuart
STAFF WRITERS
Linda Agaby
Allison Render
Samantha Rudolph
Suzanne Zaccour
Want to talk ?
Tu veux t’exprimer ?
Envoyez vos commentaires ou articles avant
jeudi 17h à l’adresse : [email protected]
Toute contribution doit indiquer le nom de
l’auteur, son année d’étude ainsi qu’un titre
pour l’article. L’article ne sera publié qu’à la
discrétion du comité de rédaction, qui
basera sa décision sur la politique de
rédaction.
Quid Novi is published by the McGill Law
Students' Association, a student society
of McGill University. The content of this
publication is the sole responsibility of
the McGill Law Students' Association
and does not necessarily represent the
views of McGill University.
Contributions should preferably be submitted
as a .doc attachment (and not, for instance,
a “.docx.”).
The Quid Novi is published weekly by the students of the Faculty of Law at McGill University. Production is made possible through the direct support of students. All contents copyright 2015 Quid Novi. Les opinions exprimées sont propres aux auteurs et ne réflètent pas nécessairement celles de l’équipe du Quid Novi. The content of this publication does not
necessarily reflect the views of the McGill Law Students’ Association or of McGill University.
Co-Editor-in-Chief
YING
CHENG
OBITER
“Whoever loves becomes humble. Those who love have, so to speak, pawned a part of their narcissism.”
– Sigmund Freud
A big thank you to all of the folks who wrote in about the curriculum reform proposal last week! The diverse points of view and
voices are highly valued, particularly since we, students, are shaped by the course material, methodologies, and overarching goals
that emerge out of the transsystemic approach. If you wanted to have a say but couldn’t make the special issue, do send us your
views anyway. We are still printing submissions and would be happy to add your voice. On this note, there is a message from the
LSA VP Academic about responding to the proposal. In addition, Molly and Benjamin take a closer look at the role of aboriginal law
in the proposed curriculum reform. And while you’re contemplating the future of transsystemia, take a look at the most recent Torts
and Tarts recipe, highlights from and a response to the feminist speed-meet, and an ever so gentle reminder from the SAO on how
to submit assignments. Finally, Charlie’s back with the Overheards and a call to submit all things Cupid related for our special V-Day
issue.
Happy February and stay warm!
QN • 10 FEB 2015 • 3
VP Academic
Léa
PelletierMarcotte
A LITTLE WORD FROM YOUR
VP ACADEMIC REGARDING
THE CURRICULAR REFORM
First of all, I would like to thank the Quid for publishing the
students’ observations on curricular reform in last week’s edition.
I also want to thank Professors Hoi Kong and Sébastien Jodoin
for inviting students to do so. I must say that even I was taken
by surprise by this initiative, as I did not know in what shape or
form the students’ input would be sought by the Faculty after the
release of the “draft proposal”. I was eager to read your comments and ideas.
which all Faculty students will be invited. Time and place have yet
to be determined but will be sent to you shortly. Notez également qu’à partir du 12 février, vous pourrez venir échanger avec
des membres du Comité du curriculum dans l’atrium, de 12h30 à
13h30 les jeudis.
Plusieurs d’entre vous ont également mentionné vouloir en
savoir plus sur la manière dont vos suggestions seront intégrées
au processus de réforme. Sur ce point, je désire vous rassurer: le
document circulé n’est d’aucune manière un document final. Ce
document, rédigé par un sous-groupe du Comité du curriculum
sur lequel siégeait un représentant étudiant, ne fait que distiller
certaines idées et perspectives. En ce sens, rien dans ce document ne doit être considéré comme immuable. Il faut plutôt le
voir comme un vecteur de discussion dont les principaux points
servent à stimuler les idées.
Bon février à tous et à toutes!
It is flowing from all of these consultations, past, ongoing, and
in the near future, that the proposals for curricular reform will
be rethought, revised, and take new shape to be discussed for a
As many of you observed, the deadlines may have seemed a little decision at Faculty Council late this term.
tight for what is such an important project, and one in which
the students’ input is fundamental. I encourage students to
Finalement, je vous invite à venir me rencontrer au local de l’AED,
keep publishing their ideas and comments about the reform in
au 3e étage, le 17 février entre 8h30 et 10h30 pour me faire part
upcoming issues of the Quid. The students’ point of view should de vos idées, craintes et suggestions quant à la réforme et le proremain front and center in this gigantic undertaking, and that is
cessus menant à celle-ci. N’hésitez pas non plus à m’écrire à mon
what drives your student representatives involved in the process. adresse courriel: [email protected]
Le numéro spécial du Quid ainsi que la consultation tenue le 27
janvier* ne sont que deux des nombreuses occasions au sein desquelles la Faculté a voulu prendre le pouls du corps estudiantin
par rapport à la réforme. Rappelons-nous que ces discussions ont
lieu depuis déjà plusieurs mois, voire années. À chaque semaine,
certains de vos représentants rencontrent des membres de la
Faculté, incluant le Doyen, et siègent sur divers comités au sein
desquels la question de la réforme est omniprésente et à chaque
fois, ils et elles s’assurent de défendre vos intérêts. À plus grande
échelle, les consultations ne font que débuter et se poursuivront
jusqu’en mars prochain.
There is much more to be discussed and there are many conversations to be had among students and Faculty members. In the
coming days, the Dean and members of the Curriculum Committee will meet with some of your student representatives on the
LSA Council regarding the curricular reform. There are other ways
in which students can participate in the curricular reform process.
A town hall meeting will be organized in the coming days, one to
QN •
10 FEB 2015
•4
*Plusieurs m’ont fait part de leur incompréhension quant à la
sélection des participants et participantes à la consultation de
janvier dernier. I had no say in this selection process. Invitations
were sent to some student representatives, alumni and stakeholders in order to achieve a cross-section, diverse attendance. The
report that will follow this consultation will address this concern.
Law I & II
Ben
Kingstone &
Molly
Churchill
REFLECTIONS ON CURRICULAR REFORM:
THE NEED FOR INDIGENOUS AND ABORIGINAL LAW
TO BE CENTRAL TO LEGAL EDUCATION AT MCGILL
We are two non-Indigenous students who are part of the Aboriginal Law Students’ Association (ALSA)1, and are taking this
opportunity to build on discussions about curriculum reform that
were had amongst ALSA members last year, and more recently
amongst both current and former ALSA members.2 While this
article builds on those discussions, we are not writing on behalf
of the ALSA.
We are generally encouraged by the direction the curriculum
renewal seems to be taking, as it seems the Faculty is making a
conscious effort to give Indigenous and Aboriginal law a more
prominent role in students’ legal education. This effort should be
lauded. For a law faculty who prides itself on a unique pluralist
approach to teaching law and which strives to shape not just
lawyers, but also informed citizens, the relative lack of opportunities in the current curriculum for learning about, grappling
with, and applying Indigenous and Aboriginal law is surprising
and disappointing. Developing a more pluralistic legal culture that
recognizes Indigenous legal traditions would not only enhance
the Faculty’s transsystemic approach, but also guarantee the relevance of a McGill Law education. It is encouraging to see there is
a thrust in this direction.
We identify three foundational reasons why the McGill
Faculty of Law must act on its considerations of incorporating
Indigenous legal traditions and Aboriginal law into its curriculum. The first reason has to do with responsible and informed
citizenship. The second has to do with shaping jurists who think
critically and creatively. The third has to do with the ubiquity
of Aboriginal legal concerns and the necessity of incorporating
Indigenous perspectives into many areas of 21st Century practice.
While we have separated these into three different reasons, in
reality the boundaries between them are not sharp; each reason
informs and interacts with the others. For the purpose of clear
presentation, however, we will touch on each separately. We will
then provide our response to the proposed “curriculum renewal”
and outline three main recommendations related to curriculum
reform and Indigenous presence at the Faculty.
what we are calling the “citizenship reason”: “This is the task for
our generation – working seriously on righting the relationship
between Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous Canadians and
Canada.” Even if we do not plan on using our legal training to
participate directly in such a process, we have a responsibility as
citizens to understand the beautiful complexity of this country-which includes the diverse views, ambitions and values of Indigenous Canadians--and to explore with mind and heart what respectful and just ways of relating look like. We as non-Indigenous
Canadians believe our participation in this pressing and daunting
process requires learning about and seeking to understand the
diverse perspectives of Indigenous peoples - perspectives which
cannot be disentangled from the respective legal orders and reasoning of Indigenous peoples across present-day Canada.
Promoting Critical and Creative Thinking
In the words of Justice Morissette, McGill Law thrives on the
conviction that “a great deal can be gained...from a sustained
dialogue with otherness.”3 By applying various legal values and
methods in our work and lives, we solve problems with greater
flexibility, resourcefulness and imagination. Exploring multiple
juridical perspectives is one of our Faculty’s central aspirations,
and studying Indigenous legal traditions will add value and relevance to our program.
“The McGill Program”, as the McGill undergraduate legal curriculum is known internationally, seeks to give students a “cosmopolitan understanding of the law, one that is not confined to
specific jurisdictions, or even legal traditions.”4 This means more
than “sequential comparison” and focuses on “integration” in an
“attempt to link perspectives to mentalités of different traditions.”5 Engaging with different views, sources, interpretations
and applications of law forces us to think more critically about
what law is, how it functions, and how it can be used to solve
problems. Studying other legal traditions teaches us about our
own traditions.
The words, “Hear the other side,” is carved in Latin above the
outer western door of New Chancellor Day Hall: Audite alteram
Promoting Responsible and Informed Citizenship
patrem. Our legal education will be incomplete if it excludes AboThe first week of classes in January, one of us was sitting in a new riginal and Indigenous legal traditions as part of this dialogue.
course entitled “Theorizing and Working Across Legal Orders.”
Our professor, who is also the Associate Dean Academic, asked
Preparing Us Substantively for Modern-Day Practice
us to articulate the merits of incorporating Indigenous legal
While perhaps only a few students in the Faculty are currently
traditions into a Canadian legal education. When asked why (if)
considering practicing Aboriginal law and working with Indigelaw students and jurists should challenge themselves to work
nous communities, learning about Aboriginal and Indigenous law
with Indigenous legal traditions, one student spoke specifically to is nevertheless critical for all those who are considering practicing
QN •
10 FEB 2015
•5
in more “mainstream” areas of the law. Indigenous law is not just these concerns and observations:
spreading into other areas of law as it grows in impact and scope,
1. Indigenous legal traditions, Aboriginal law, and legal
jurisprudence also instructs that it be more formally consideissues within Indigenous communities need to be
red. Canadian substantive law, through both s. 35 Aboriginal
incorporated into core courses AND form the main
law jurisprudence and legislative enactments, mandates that
subject matter of others. As mentioned, the proposal to
Indigenous legal perspectives be incorporated into many areas of
incorporate Indigenous legal traditions into the first-year
Canadian law. These include family law, criminal law and sentenproperty course is a step in the right direction. McGill
cing, natural resource law, human rights law, and more. When we
currently falls well behind many other Canadian law
begin practicing in these areas of law, we will be disadvantaged if
schools both in terms of incorporation of Indigenous and
we are unfamiliar with how law formally incorporates Indigenous
Aboriginal law into more general courses and in terms
perspectives and uncomfortable working with Indigenous legal
of offering courses specifically on topics of Indigenous
traditions. For those who work in government, an understanding
and Aboriginal law. For example, Aboriginal legal consiof the “Honour of the Crown” is essential. The Supreme Court
derations are specifically mentioned in Osgoode Hall’s
has made it clear that, whenever the Crown has dealings with
course descriptions of courses about criminal sentenIndigenous people, the “Honour of the Crown” is at stake (e.g. R.
cing, youth justice, evidence, and trusts. The University
v. Badger, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 771).
of Victoria currently offers courses such as Indigenous
Feminist Legal Studies and Indigenous Lands, Rights and
In an address at a conference in 2012, Justice Finch emphasized
Governance - in addition to a Legal Clinic Course where
that a simple focus on the Honour of the Crown and the duties it
students have the opportunity to gain practical expeimposes (including the duty to consult and the duty to accommorience providing legal information to First Nations and
date) is insufficient.6 He proposed that a further “duty to learn”
others on environmental protection and law. The McGill
about Indigenous legal traditions should fall upon all those worFaculty of Law should ensure that students have the
king in the legal profession: “a more widely applicable concept of
opportunity to grapple with and apply Indigenous law,
honour imposes on all members of the legal profession the duty
and not treat it as an artifact.
to learn: at the very least, to holding ourselves ready to learn.”
2. The McGill Faculty of Law needs to recruit faculty
These comments remind us how important it is for us as law
members who specialize in Indigenous law and Aboristudents and citizens to support the meaningful incorporation of
ginal law. Meaningful incorporation of Indigenous and
Indigenous and Aboriginal law into our legal curriculum.
Aboriginal law necessitates faculty members who can
deliver the content. Professor Anker is currently the only
Response to Proposed Curriculum Renewal
faculty member we are aware of with expertise in these
Given the reasons we have outlined about the necessity of meafields. The relative lack of course offerings related to
ningfully incorporating Indigenous and Aboriginal law into the
Indigenous legal traditions or Aboriginal law at McGill is
McGill Faculty of Law’s curriculum, what do we think about the
undoubtedly tied to the absence of Indigenous profesproposed “curriculum renewal”?
sors at the faculty and the relative lack of professors who
specialize in these fields. In addition to prioritizing new
First of all, we are encouraged to see that effort is being made
faculty members able to teach in these areas, the Faculty
to dedicate more space and time to Indigenous legal traditions
could also provide additional support, training, and
and issues. By restructuring how property is taught, and mainseducation for other faculty members to enable them to
treaming Indigenous traditions into the course, the Faculty will
meaningfully incorporate Indigenous legal traditions and
ensure that all of us have at least minimal exposure to Indigenous
interests into their courses.
legal traditions over the course of our legal education. This is a
3. The McGill Faculty of Law needs to develop an Indigewelcome change!
nous recruitment policy. Not only should the Faculty
prioritize attracting Indigenous professors, but it should
We are cautiously optimistic about the proposed integration
also make concerted efforts to recruit and retain selfweek for first year law students. On the one hand, starting off our
identified Indigenous/Aboriginal students. According to
legal education with an intensive week “devoted to an issue in
the admissions website, 85% of the 2013 entering class
Indigenous law” may help Indigenous law be more prominent in
filled out a survey on educational, linguistic, and cultural
our education and may suggest that it is a priority. On the other
background. Four percent of respondents self-identihand, it risks suggesting that Indigenous law can be learned in
fied as Inuit, First Nations or Métis.7 However, a year
one week, while the common law and civil law traditions take
previously, of the seven applicants who self-identified
years to learn. We look forward to further information about
as Aboriginal, only one ended up entering the McGill
what this week might look like, and how this learning will be built
Faculty of Law; three were made offers of admission, but
on throughout students’ legal education. We recognize the potenone declined and another deferred. While the Admistial harm a temporary and reductive discussion of Aboriginal law
sions website professes that “First Nations, Inuit and
and Indigenous legal traditions could have on first year students.
Métis persons are strongly encouraged to apply” to the
These crucial areas of law deserve substantial integration into the
McGill Faculty of Law, there seems to be little action that
Faculty’s curriculum. A number of recommendations flow from
accompanies these words. Giving more prominence to
QN •
10 FEB 2015
•6
Indigenous and Aboriginal law might be an indirect way
of attracting more Indigenous students. Many other
Canadian law schools have either separate admissions
program for Indigenous applicants, or take additional/
other factors into account when considering applications
from Indigenous applicants.8 The McGill Faculty of Law
should consider doing the same. Furthermore, concerted outreach efforts to Indigenous communities would
also be a good step. The Faculty could learn from the
efforts of Indigenous Access McGill, a support program
for Indigenous students that is based at the School of
Social Work.9
about legal issues affecting Canada’s Indigenous populations.
Aboriginal Law Students’ Association members also seek to
expose students at the Faculty to the legal traditions of [Indigenous] peoples in Canada.” (http://www.indigenousmcgill.ca/
project/alsa/)
2
Thanks especially to Eden Alexander, Andra Syvänen, and Véronique McKinnon.
3
in Jukier, Rosalie, “Where Law and Pedagogy Meet in the Transsystemic Classroom.” McGill Law Journal, Dec 2005.
4
https://www.mcgill.ca/centre-crepeau/transsystemic/
5
ibid at 2.
6
Lance S J Finch, CJ, “Indigenous Legal Orders and the CommonLaw” (address delivered at the Indigenous Legal Orders and the
We are excited that the proposed “curriculum renewal” seems
Common Law, conference of the Continuing Legal Education
to be moving towards realizing some ideas and visions that have Society of British Columbia, Vancouver, 12-13 November 2012).
7
been explored and discussed in recent, and perhaps not-so-rehttp://www.mcgill.ca/law-admissions/undergraduates/admiscent, years about meaningful incorporation of Indigenous and
sions/faq
Aboriginal law into the Faculty’s curriculum and identity. We hope 8 https://lawschool.ualberta.ca/programs/juris-doctor/aboriginalthat the reflections and suggestions we have put down in writing applicants; http://www.dal.ca/faculty/law/programs/jd-admishere can help with this momentum, and that they will encourage sions/admission-requirements.html; http://www.uvic.ca/law/
further discussion amongst us all.
admissions/firstyearadmissions/indigenouscategory/index.php;
http://www.queensu.ca/apply/aboriginal
1
9
The ALSA “is a group of McGill [Indigenous] and nonhttp://www.mcgill.ca/fph/student-support-services/indigenous[Indigenous] law students committed to raising public awareness access-mcgill
Law II
SUZANNE
ZACCOUR
SPEED-MEET FÉMINISTE: WHO IS IN CHARGE?
Article originellement publié sur www.decolereetdespoir.blogspot.com
Mercredi passé se tenait à la faculté l’annuel “speed-meet
féministe”, une activité de réseautage professionnel inspiré du
modèle du speed-dating (clochette incluse). Une occasion rêvée
de rencontrer des avocates et autres juristes de milieux variés,
aux parcours tous différents mais qui ont toutes fait face aux
mêmes difficultés de la pratique d’un « métier d’hommes ». Du
droit municipal au droit du travail, de la pratique en entreprise à
l’emploi gouvernemental, de la conseillère à la juge, de la carrière
impressionnante aux débuts prometteurs, toutes les expériences
relatées par les invitées sont pertinentes et inspirantes. On parle
de la très-mal-nommée conciliation travail-famille (je préfère
mode de vie équilibré, ou conciliation travail-études-famille-militance-loisirs, ou work life balance), d’opportunités d’emploi, de
stratégie, de flexibilité et de mobilité. Le réseautage étant plutôt
absent de la culture du genre féminin, ce genre de pratiques doit
être activement développé par et pour les femmes. Le speedmeet permet aussi d’aborder des enjeux dont on ne parle pas
dans les événements plus mixtes où les hommes ont tendance
à dominer la discussion des deux côtés (micro et auditoire) de la
salle. Cette année encore, grâce au travail admirable de certaines
de mes collègues, l’événement s’est révélé un grand succès et
s’est montré à la hauteur de telles ambitions.
Pourtant, malgré la bonne nourriture, il nous reste à la fin de la
soirée un arrière-goût amer. D’une table à l’autre et même d’une
année à l’autre, certains problèmes restent irrésolus – insolubles,
peut-être?
Le meilleur conseil
« Le meilleur conseil que je puisse vous donner », nous annoncent
les invitées. On tend l’oreille. Eh bien, le meilleur conseil que des
avocates d’expérience donnent à des jeunes étudiantes, c’est de
se trouver un conjoint qui se lève la nuit. Qui « comprend » les
exigences et les réalités de notre métier. Qui change des couches.
Bref, un papa décent qui fait sa part. Une avocate deux fois mère
nous propose que la décision d’avoir unE enfant est un acte de
foi : la foi en son partenaire. Passons par-dessus le caractère très
hétéronormatif de ces conseils. Dans une époque où on questionne encore la compétence des femmes, le plus grand obstacle
à leur carrière demeure pourtant l’enfant, ou, plus exactement,
l’égoïsme et le manque d’implication du père. Même les avocates
sont condamnées au changement de couches, et c’est terriblement frustrant. Parce que je ne veux faire de peine à personne,
mais les couples hétérosexuels égalitaires (et les hommes qui les
forment), ça ne court pas les rues. Et les palais de justice non plus.
QN •
10 FEB 2015
•7
D’ailleurs, la justice dans le couple est encore fictionnelle.
loppement professionnel.
Le problème est beaucoup plus insidieux qu’il n’en a l’air. Supposons que j’arrive à échapper aux pressions d’être une « bonne
épouse » et une « bonne mère » (groooooos guillemets), que je
forme miraculeusement un couple égalitaire dans lequel je ne
suis pas par défaut en charge des rendez-vous médicaux, sorties
scolaires, cuisine et achat de fournitures, un couple où je ne suis
pas non plus la « femme de » qui organise les soupers avec les
clientEs, repasse les chemises et confirme les rendez-vous de
mon mari. Même dans cette situation où je ne fais que 50% des
tâches ménagères et familiales, je suis encore désavantagée,
parce que je compétitionne avec des hommes qui ne font aucun
travail non salarié. Non seulement ça : je suis aussi en compétition avec des hommes qui ont derrière (en-dessous) d’eux
une femme-secrétaire, une épouse-femme-de-ménage, une
conjointe-gardienne… Je dois performer autant que l’avocat qui
travaille à temps plein (plutôt que temps double) et qui « vit à
l’hôtel » ! Évidemment, tout cela s’ajoute à la réalité du fait d’être
femme, qui exige de moi une meilleure performance et une plus
grande compétence pour qu’on me reconnaisse la même valeur
qu’un homme. Je me contenterai ici de citer Charlotte Whitton :
« Quoiqu’elle fasse, une femme doit le faire deux fois mieux que
l’homme afin qu’on en pense du bien. Heureusement, ce n’est
pas difficile ! » (misandriiiiiiiiie!!!).
L’hypothèse jamais questionnée est la volonté d’avoir des enfants
– c’est un acquis. Bien que je sois mal à l’aise avec l’association
« événement pour femmes » = « parlons de parentalité », qu’on
peut qualifier de sexiste, je sais qu’elle répond au problème
« événement mixte » = « ne parlons pas de maternité », qui
l’est tout autant. C’est en tout cas une question sensible qui ne
manque pas de provoquer des malaises : la position féministe sur
la maternité est loin d’être claire et consensuelle.
Il ne faut pas nier les difficultés spécifiques aux mères qui travaillent. Je crains cependant qu’on ne grossisse la montagne. Il
y a un narratif qui n’est jamais raconté. Je ne sais pas si c’est le
narratif féministe, mais comme c’est celui de ma mère, je vous
le partage : ma mère a élevé presque seule trois enfants (mes
grands-frères) pendant qu’elle faisait son doctorat et travaillait
à temps plein. Ma mère était du genre « j’accouche vendredi, je
travaille lundi matin », parce que son emploi la passionne. J’ai
fréquenté la garderie dès l’âge de trois mois, et j’ai visité le lieu
de travail de mes parents bien avant d’être en âge de marcher
sur mes deux jambes. Ma mère n’est pas la personne moyenne,
et je ne souhaite pas que les femmes ne réussissent qu’en étant
des superwomen. N’empêche, c’est un récit qui me rassure et que
j’aimerais entendre. Je soupçonne que, si on ne parle pas de la
possibilité d’une maternité moins « prenante », ce n’est pas parce
que les femmes sont incapables de concilier carrière et maternité, mais c’est que ne pas se consacrer corps et âme à autrui est
encore mal vu chez les femmes. La culture du sacrifice est trop
importante, et la responsabilité d’élever les enfants est encore
trop intrinsèquement lié au rôle de mère : ne dis-je pas moimême que « ma mère » m’a mise à la garderie?
Je ne reproche pas aux avocates leurs conseils en matière de vie
amoureuse et familiale – pour ma part, ça fait longtemps que le
critère d’égalité dans le travail non-salarié est incontournable.
C’est simplement que je me sens triste, et impuissante. Un ami
trouvait dommage, ou du moins surprenant, qu’il n’y ait pas plus
d’hommes présents au speed-meet. En réalité, les étudiants qui
ne sont pas intéressés par cet événement jouissent de l’énorme
privilège de ne pas avoir à gérer ce type de préoccupations. Rien Je n’ai pas de carrière pour me donner de crédibilité, mais je
n’est simple quand on est femme. Pas sortir dans la rue. Et certai- donne à mon tour un conseil à mes camarades : ne sacrifiez pas
nement pas choisir une carrière.
votre carrière à votre famille. Ne sacrifiez pas votre carrière à
votre couple. Ne sacrifiez pas votre carrière. En fait, ne sacrifiez
Un dernier mot sur les conseils de conciliation « travail-famille » : rien. Prenons tout tant que nous en sommes capables, en attenbien que les congés parentaux soient protégés par la loi (heureu- dant (et en luttant pour) que notre société en soit une où nous
sement!), on nous a recommandé de demeurer active pendant
aurons tout.
cette période et même au-delà, si on « décide » (notez les guillemets) de mettre notre carrière sur « pause ». L’exemple donné Qui est en charge?
: s’impliquer à l’école de notre enfant. Conclusion? Trouvez un
Malgré ces quelques bémols, l’événement fut, je le répète un
papa qui « fait la maman », mais faites la maman quand même.
succès. Mais il n’existe pas de « bulle » ou de safe space dont on
pourrait exclure le sexisme ou le privilège masculin. J’invite mes
UnE enfant, si je veux, quand je veux : vraiment?
collègues hommes qui ont participé au speed-meet à témoigner
Les conseils de carrière, on en prend et on en laisse. Personneldu nombre de fois où on les a remerciés de leur présence (!) et
lement, je « laisse » tout ce qui tombe dans la catégorie « quand des phrases qui ont été « masculinisées » parce qu’ignorer un
avoir ses enfants ». Tout le monde a un avis là-dessus. Le plus
homme, ça ne se fait pas (on dira « les étudiants » quand la moitôt possible, le plus tard possible, à mi-carrière… Sans aucun
tié sont des femmes, mais pas « les étudiantes » quand le dixième
doute bien intentionnées, les juristes nous donnent des conseils sont des hommes). Mais l’anecdote qui est peut-être la plus
irréconciliables, qui ne font que rendre le tout plus stressant, et
marquante de la soirée, par son extrême ironie, est la suivante :
remettent dramatiquement en question le slogan pro-choix «
à la fin de l’événement exclusivement organisé par des femmes
des enfants, si je veux, quand je veux ». Soyons honnêtes : il n’y
membresses du Collectif féministe, une passante se dirige vers les
a pas de bon moment pour avoir unE enfant – quand on est une deux seuls hommes encore présents dans la salle au moment du
femme, bien sûr. Inutile de dire que les hommes ont aussi des
rangement et leur demande : « are you in charge? ».
enfants (surprise!), sans que cela ait de réel impact sur leur déve-
QN •
10 FEB 2015
•8
INNOCENCE MCGILL CONFERENCE
CRIMINAL OR VICTIM?
A Dialogue on Mental Illness, Non-Criminal Responsibility, and Wrongful Conviction
JOHN KASTNER
Emmy-Winning Director of Not Criminally Responsible
NOELLA & ANDY BOUVIER Parents of Victim Julie Bouvier, Featured in Kastner’s Film
ME PIERRE POUPART
Defence Lawyer
DR ANNE CROCKER
Professor of Psychiatry at McGill University
18 February 2015
!
5:00 - 6:00 pm
Film Screening of Not Criminally
Responsible
6:15 - 7:30 pm
Panel / Q&A
7:30 - 8:30 pm
Cocktail Reception
!
Moot Court
McGill Faculty of Law
3660 Peel Street
Please RSVP to
[email protected]
CLE C R E DI T S p e nd i ng
THE FILM
Gripped by psychosis, a troubled
young man stabs a complete
stranger six times. The young man,
Sean Clifton, is deemed mentally ill,
and therefore not criminally
responsible for his actions. He is then
confined to a forensic mental health
institution, much to the relief of his
victim, Julie Bouvier. Twelve years
later, under a progressive treatment
plan designed to reintegrate patients
into society, Sean is living in the
community under supervision, with
surprising results. He’s seeking an
absolute discharge. If he’s successful,
he will no longer be required to take
the anti-psychotic drugs that control
his mental illness—and his potential
for violence.
THE PANEL
In light of the complexities of moral
culpability and the misconceptions
surrounding mental illness, we will
examine Section 16 of the Criminal
Code of Canada, also known as the
“insanity defence.” Section 16 states
that persons suffering from mental
disorders cannot, under certain
conditions, be held criminally
responsible for their acts. Are these
provisions adequate? What are the
impacts of Section 16 on the lives of
individuals with mental illness and on
the lives of their victims? Is the risk of
wrongful conviction higher or lower in
this context? Should these cases be
treated analogous to other cases of
factual innocence? Our panel
members will shed light on these
issues by drawing on their diverse
areas of expertise.
Professor
OTTAWA MUST NOW DRAFT AN ASSISTEDSUICIDE LAW.
IT SHOULD LOOK TO QUEBEC
ROBERT
LECKEY
This article was originally published in The Globe and Mail on February 6, 2015.
On Friday, the Supreme Court of Canada declared that the law
banning assisted suicide violates constitutional rights. The law, aimed at protecting the vulnerable, reached too broadly by denying
physician-assisted death to competent adults whose terminal
medical condition inflicts intolerable suffering on them. While the
ball is now in Parliament’s court, many difficult questions face our
elected representatives at the federal and provincial levels.
Quebec’s experience on these matters is instructive. In June,
Quebec adopted legislation regarding end-of-life-care. The law
sets out a rigorous process by which terminally ill individuals can
obtain medical aid in dying. It also recognizes a right to receive
palliative care. We can draw three lessons.
For some, the conditions are too onerous. For others, they don’t
do enough to protect individuals vulnerable to pressure.
Third, whatever our view on the big questions of morality, life
and death, concrete questions of resources are inescapable.
Like those in other provinces, Quebec’s government is strapped
for cash. The palliative-care community is worried that budget
constraints will undermine the law’s promise of a right to end-oflife care.
It can be uncomfortable to combine the moral questions of how
we wish to end our lives with the financial questions of the health
care our governments can afford. But denying the connection
is illogical. Whatever our views on assisted suicide, it is beyond
dispute that the health care system dedicates ever-growing
First, respectful, meaningful public deliberation on delicate moral amounts of public funds to prolonging life, often without prolonand legal questions remains possible. Quebeckers had numerous ging quality of life.
opportunities to participate in the legislative process. The bill that
was finally adopted drew support across party lines.
By striking down the criminal ban on assisted suicide, Friday’s
judgment assigns homework to the Parliament of Canada. This
Of course, not everyone in Quebec approves of the law. There’s a issue’s health-care dimension means that our provincial governgeneral sense, however, that the path exemplified the legislative ments also have work to do. Let’s hope all are up to the task.
process at its best. This is reassuring at a moment when social
media intensify the shrillness of public discourse and it seems
that politicians often prefer to leave hard social questions to
judges.
In the wake of another recent Charter judgment, the federal
government turned its reform regarding sex work into a divisive,
ideological exercise. Canadians should demand better from the
government on this matter.
Second, Quebec’s law shows the complexity of legislating in
this area. It’s one thing to agree, as polls show most Canadians
do, that a total ban on assisted suicide goes too far. It’s another
to attempt the delicate line-drawing between permissible and
impermissible cases.
For example, Quebec’s law tightly circumscribes medical aid in
dying. Having a serious and incurable illness and experiencing
constant and unbearable suffering aren’t enough if the patient
isn’t at the end of her life.
The law imposes requirements for verifying that a patient requesting lethal medical aid has given consent freely and informedly.
QN •
10 FEB 2015
• 10
DCL Candidate
Jodi
Lazare
RIGHT TO DIE MAY BE
A FLEETING VICTORY
This article was originally published in the Toronto Star on February 7, 2015.
In an undeniable win for proponents of the right to die with
dignity, the Supreme Court of Canada declared Friday that the
criminal prohibition on assisting suicide is unconstitutional.
the new prostitution law, the Protection of Communities and
Exploited Persons Act, is not only unconstitutional, but even more
dangerous for sex workers than the previous regime. And while
efforts may be underway to mount yet another constitutional
The decision is undoubtedly historic; those in favour of the decri- challenge, the wheels of justice turn slowly in Canada. It is safe to
minalization or legalization of providing assistance in dying will
say that it will be years before the Supreme Court evaluates the
be singing the court’s praises for weeks and months to come. But new sex work bill.
the victory may be short-lived; in some sense, the court doesn’t
get the last word.
In refusing to immunize provincial laws permitting assistance in
dying from the operation of a federal law prohibiting the same,
The decision struck down the law as a breach of the constituthe Supreme Court has created a serious obstacle to the adoption
tional rights and freedoms outlined in the Canadian Charter,
of the kind of progressive legislation that exists in jurisdictions
specifically the right not to be deprived of life, liberty and security such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland,
of the person except in conformity with the principles of fundaOregon, Washington, Montana and Colombia — the very same
mental justice. The court gave Parliament one year to rewrite the legislation that the Court referred to in Friday’s decision.
law. If it does not, the criminal prohibition will simply be of no
force or effect.
Instead, the decision effectively enabled the federal government
to override the efforts of provinces, like Quebec, which recently
The arguments before the Court were not limited to Charter
adopted comprehensive legislation enabling physician-assisted
questions. The court was also asked to find that the determinadeath pursuant to its constitutional jurisdiction over health. Given
tion and delivery of appropriate medical treatment, including
the government’s staunch defence of the criminal prohibition on
physician-assisted death, falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of assisted dying throughout the judicial process, no stretch of the
the provinces. Had the court accepted this argument, Parliament imagination is required to predict that provincial efforts to legiswould have been precluded from regulating treatment options,
late in the area may be quickly thwarted by a new federal law.
including physician-assisted death. Instead, the court repeated its
earlier pronouncements that jurisdiction over health is shared by The Carter decision is a victory for Canadians and should be
the two levels of government.
celebrated as such. But in our constitutional structure, the
Supreme Court does not truly get the final say. Whether Friday’s
In our federation, in the case of a conflict between federal and
victory is but a fleeting one will be up to an ideologically driven
provincial laws dealing with the same activity, federal law pregovernment that makes no secret of its opposition to progressive
vails. There is reason to believe that in the coming year Parlialegislation on controversial questions like assisted dying.
ment may pass a new law that continues to criminalize assisted
dying, albeit in a narrower form than the under current law. If this
happens, any provincial law permitting the practice more broadly
will become inoperative.
It has been only a few months since the federal government
adopted new, prohibitive legislation to combat sex work in
Canada following the Supreme Court’s 2013 Bedford decision
to strike down some of the Criminal Code provisions relating to
prostitution. The court’s decision was grounded in the overwhelming evidence that the challenged laws threatened the safety
and lives of sex workers.
The vast majority of constitutional law experts believe that
QN •
10 FEB 2015
• 11
MCGILL
JOURNAL
OF LAW AND
HEALTH
THE NOT CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE
REFORM ACT:
MENTAL HEALTH AND THE LAW
The McGill Journal of Law and Health (MJLH) is pleased to
announce its seventh annual Colloquium, titled The Not Criminally Responsible Reform Act: Mental Health and the Law. This
bilingual and student-based initiative promotes interdisciplinary
dialogue on issues where the law and health intersect, with the
goal of encouraging the development of better health care policy
in Canada.
La Revue de droit et santé de McGill est heureuse d’annoncer la
tenue de son septième colloque intitulé «Loi sur la réforme de la
non-responsabilité criminelle : le droit et la santé mentale». Le
but de cette initiative étudiante et bilingue est de promouvoir un
dialogue interdisciplinaire sur les enjeux du droit et de la santé
dans le but d’encourager le développement de meilleures politiques de santé publique au Canada.
The Colloquium will facilitate a critical discussion of the Act’s
merits, particularly with respect to the perceived tension
between the promotion of public safety and the protection of the
rights of mentally ill persons accused of criminal offences. This
year’s panelists will discuss the Act’s potential to achieve its goal
of increasing public safety in light of its possible implications on
society’s understanding and treatment of mental illness.
Le colloque favorisera une discussion analytique sur les mérites
de la Loi en ce qui a trait à la promotion de la sécurité publique et
la tension envers la protection des droits des personnes accusées d’infractions criminelles souffrant de problèmes de santé
mentale. Nos panélistes discuteront du potentiel de la Loi dans le
renforcement de la sécurité publique en contraste avec ses implications possibles sur la perception et le traitement des problèmes
de santé mentale.
The MJLH will welcome a panel of guests from across the country,
including: Mr. Michael Arruda, from the Service de police de
la Ville de Montréal; Dr. Patrick Baillie, from the Mental Health
Commission of Canada; Dr. Hy Bloom, Adjunct Professor at the
University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law and Assistant Professor in
the Department of Medicine; Dr. Renée Fugère, from l’Institut
Philippe-Pinel de Montréal; Dr. Archibald Kaiser, from the Schulich
School of Law and the Department of Psychiatry at Dalhousie University; and, the Honourable Justice Mr. Richard Schneider, Chair
of the Ontario Review Board. Professor Alana Klein, from McGill’s
Faculty of Law, will moderate the panel.
La RDSM accueillera un panel d’invités d’à travers le pays,
incluant : M. Michael Arruda, de la Service de police de la Ville
de Montréal; Dr Patrick Baillie, de la Commission de la santé
mentale du Canada; Dr Hy Bloom, professeur adjoint à la Faculté
de droit à l’Université de Toronto et professeur auxiliaire à la
Faculté de médecine; Dr Renée Fugère, de l’Institut Philippe Pinel
de Montréal; Dr Archibald Kaiser de la Faculté Schulich de droit
à l’Université Dalhousie et le Département de psychiatrie; et,
Monsieur le Juge Richard D. Schneider, Chaire de la Commission
ontarienne d’examen.
This full-day event will take place on Saturday, February 21st,
2015 from 9:30 am to 3:00 pm in the Maxwell Cohen Moot Court
at the McGill Faculty of Law (3660 Peel Street). Tickets are $5 in
advance or $10 at the door. For RSVPs and tickets, please contact
[email protected].
Le colloque aura lieu le samedi 21 février 2015, de 9 h 30 à 15
h dans le Maxwell Cohen Moot Court à la Faculté de droit à
l’Université McGill (3660 rue Peel). Les billets seront vendus 5$
en avance et 10$ à la porte. Pour des billets ou plus de renseignements, veuillez contacter [email protected]
La Revue de droit et santé de McGill est heureuse d’annoncer la
QN •
10 FEB 2015
• 12
SAO Corner
HOW TO SUBMIT ASSIGNMENTS TO THE SAO
• Use your McGill email only
• Send to [email protected]
CC Professor (unless otherwise specified)
• Email subject line: Course Name – Assignment Name
• Email Body: Student Name – McGill ID#
• Save assignment as follows:
Course Name – Assignment Name – Identifier
(Identifier: as specified by the professor )
SAO OFFICE HOURS FOR 2015
Mondays/Wednesdays: 10am to 2pm
Tuesdays/Thursdays: 9am to 12:30pm & 2-4pm
Fridays: 10am-12pm
•
•
Law Peer to Peer Support Program / Programme de soutien des
pairs en droit - Drop In hours!
Mercredi de 13h00 à 14h30, NCDH 203
Jeudi de 11h30 à 13h00, NCDH 203
Exceptions: Jeudi de 11h30 à 12h30 dans la salle NCDH 203
seulement du 29 janvier au 19 février
February 2015/SAO Events
2L Student Life &
Learning Series
Drop-in, Question
and Answer Session
Monday Feb.16,
1:00-2:30pm, NDCH
200
Clinical Legal
Education Open
House
Wednesday, Feb.
18, 1:00-2:30pm,
Atrium
*Pizza will be served*
Ask an Advisor!
Drop-in, Question
& Answer Session
Monday, Feb. 23,
1:00-2:30pm,
Atrium
*lunch will be served*
Intro. to Mindfulness
Based Stress
Management
Workshop (offered
by McGill
Counselling Services)
Wednesday, Feb. 25,
1:00-2:30pm,
NDCH 200
CONTESTS/SUBMISSIONS/AWARDS
http://www.mcgill.ca/law-studies/information/funding/external
U21 UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH CONFERENCE 2015 IN NEW ZEALAND – JULY
6-10, 2015 -> Deadline: Wednesday, February 11 at 3pm
The Dalai Lama Fellow (DLF) Program ->Deadline: February 15, 2015
La fiducie des dirigeants juridiques pour la diversité ->
Date limite: 20 février, 2015, Valeur: Huit bourses d’études de 3 000 $ CAN
CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE ET D’INDUSTRIE CANADA-LIBAN
Date limite: vendredi 20 février 2015
L'Association du Barreau canadien (ABC): Concours de dissertation 2015:
Date limite: 28 février 2015, Valeur: 250 $ à 2 500 $
Law II
LINDSAY
LITTLE &
EMMA LOIGNONgIROUX
TORTS AND TARTS/DÉLITS-CIEUX
No-Plain-Jane plantain chips
Guacamole à Rih-ananas
It’s a banana! It’s a potato! It’s…a plantain! For the lucky ones
who made it to DALA’s “Law and Entrepreneurship” event, you
may remember these as the (outrageously) spicy chips accompanying some of our dips. This recipe is a little toned down but
definitely no Average Joe. I would suggest making and eating the
same day (which shouldn’t be too difficult considering how tasty
they are).
We Found Love avec cette recette qui était vraiment da One
pour accompagner les chips aux plantains. Nous nous sommes
demandé Where Have You Been et je doute maintenant pouvoir
retourner au guacamole ordinaire puisque, pour moi, c’est le Only
Guac (In the World). Après avoir servi ceci à vos invité(e)s, ils/elles
vous diront sans doute : Take A Bow!
Ingredients
• 2 plantains (green or yellow, up to you!)
• 2 tbsp olive oil
• 3 tbsp lime juice
• 3 tbsp chili powder
• ½ tsp cayenne pepper (be really careful here, if your
hand is shaking and you put too much, you might end up
saying “Holy chip this is spicy!”)
• ½ tsp cinnamon
• dash of salt
Ingrédients
• 2 avocats (je vous suggère d’aller à l’épicerie puisque
ceux à la Faculté ne sont peut-être pas encore assez
mûrs)
• 2/3 tasse d’ananas haché
• 1 oignon rouge, finement haché
• 2 gousses d’ail émincées
• 1 touffe de coriandre fraiche, finement hachée
• 2 c. à table de jus de lime (ce qui est tellement parfait
puisque vous avez fait la recette précédente… pas vrai??)
• 1 c. à thé de zeste de lime, finement haché
• sel et poivre
Preheat the oven to 400°F and line with parchment paper or coat
with cooking spray.
Mettre les avocats et les ananas dans un bol et piler avec une
fourchette (si vos avocats ne sont pas assez mûrs, couper en dés
Peel the plantain. This is actually harder than it sounds, as the
et piler ensuite).
peel is not as thin as a banana’s. I suggest cutting the top off and
then making a lengthwise incision and peeling from there. After, Ajouter l’oignon, l’ail et la coriandre et bien mélanger.
cut the plantain diagonally into thin strips (think thicker than
regular chips but not as thick as a Supreme Court decision).
Presser le jus de lime dans le bol et ajouter le zeste. Bien mélanger.
Combine the oil and lime juice in a bowl and add the plantains.
Toss until they are well coated. In a smaller bowl, combine the
Saler et poivrer au goût et servir avec les chips aux plantains (préspices and salt, and sprinkle over the plantains, tossing again until férablement fraichement sorties du four).
they are evenly seasoned.
Lay out the chips in a single layer on the baking sheet, baking for *Note : These recipes were adapted from the Thug Kitchen coo20 minutes, and flipping halfway through (don’t skip this!). These kbook. Although I don’t condone thuggery, this book is seriously
are definitely best eaten the day of, so invite your friends over
great. And also hilarious.
and enjoy with the next recipe!
QN •
10 FEB 2015
• 15
In-House Diva
CHARLIE
FELDMAN
FROM THE DESK OF THE IN-HOUSE DIVA
OVERHEARDS!
2L: Whenever someone says balsamic I hear “ballsack” in my
head. It’s really not helpful.
Y’all heard my plea, heard my cries…. AND NOW WE’RE BACK TO
OVERHEARD TIME!!! Please keep me in the loop - don’t just post LLM – Italy: Watch closely, this is the only time I’ll strip for you.
them on Facebook because then they’re not submissions for Quid (takes off sweatshirt slowly)
purposes and blah blah blah pretty pretty please think of the
LLM – America: *fakes extremely violent vomiting sounds*
children, etc: [email protected]. Merci tout le monde! On
aime bien les overheards en français si vous en avez !
MY OVERHEARDS
Prof. Jukier: I don’t like nude photos and I don’t like cocaine. And
I haven’t tried either of them! … But does it mean people who
have shouldn’t be judges?
Prof. Campbell: Your thesis is NOT a «Dear Diary» moment!!
I was recently traveling and had the misfortune of sitting in front
of a very drunk over-talker on a flight. Here are some selected
overheards I jotted down on my laptop, because well, 21-year
old Ashley from San Francisco had a lot of insight to provide her
fellow passengers in the back of economy class on United flight
1749:
Prof. Fox-Decent (to explain why weaker parties enter into
contracts with stronger parties on disadvantageous terms): Luke •
Skywalker can always come and save the day; but in reality, Darth
Vader always wins.
Prof. Campbell: This is quick group work - I don’t want a lot of
naval gazing or existential crises.
Prof. Fox-Decent: For Hobbes, the character Data on Star Trek
would be a natural person. Cylons in Battlestar Galactica would
also be natural persons.
•
•
Prof. (Redacted): He eventually married a Canadian woman,
which is fatal... for tax purposes.
Prof. Campbell: I’m totally ready for Scrabble now and I also know
why people don’t read for this class!
So this one time I did a grammie of acid and like, I saw this
dragon’s head with a bear’s body just asking me to pet it, so
like I did... but it was just a bush and I was so upset when I
found out. My friend has it on video. I’m just there in this
bush yelling «YOU LIED TO ME MOTHERF**KER» and rage
pissing. I still get upset when I think about it -- F**ker lied to
me!
I really want to be old. Like super old. Like 70. Like, throwing
sh*t in the supermarket just because I can old. Who the f**k
is going to stop some old lady just throwing soup cans and
sh*t? That’s what I want my life to be - not in some boringass nursing home pretending to like bingo and death and
Jeopardy. F**k that sh*t.
Prof. Campbell: We’re getting to a philosophical plane here -which makes me kind of nervous…
Quid Note: I actually audibly guffawed at this by accident
and got «Who laughed?» and then pretended I was into the
movie on my laptop because I didn’t want to engage. Does
that make me a horrible person? Probably.
2L: If a firm drops $2000 on liquor, ham tubes and iPads at Coffee •
House for ungrateful law students, the least they could do is STFU
for three minutes during the rep’s speech!
I don’t want kids. What the f**k do I want to get fat for just
so some little brat can have a bad attitude and spend my
money and poop all over sh*t?
1L: I personally do wake up in the morning thinking about how I
can be a coldhearted witch. I also ride a broom to school - great
gas mileage.
So this one time we hot boxed an elevator at my school. It
was AWESOME. I mean, the principal was angry and whatever, but I was just like «Dude, toke up and chill the f**k
out» and then I got suspended or whatever. Wait, was I
suspended? No, it was deten- oh no, that was the time I was
expelled… I almost forgot. Man, it feels like so long ago!
3L: Did you hear? Bruce is having Jenner reassignment surgery.
Yeah, that’s right – I keep up with the Kardashians.
•
QN •
10 FEB 2015
• 17
SKIT NITE NOTES
First, THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU to the many PROFS
who said they would be involved in the one-liner video! I’ll be in
touch with you all later this week to set up times. If you’re a Prof
seeing this and have yet to be approached re Skit Nite, please
holler my direction (or if you’ve changed your mind about not
wanting to be involved :p).
Students – I’ll need a few of you to have a quick 2-second cameo
(no words) in a video that’s yet to be filmed, probably on a Friday
afternoon. If you happen to be around the Faculty, don’t mind
being on film, and are game to have your face on the Internet
FOREVER: [email protected]. I might also need someone
to say two-three lines. I don’t have a time yet for this and can’t
write the plot here (that ruins the fun!) but will shoot you more
info. OH! I also need some help with drafting some lines in
French for a different project (no worries – you would not be on
stage or on film).
One of the plotlines of the episode involved Kourtney’s boyfriend
Scott Disick trying to convince her to let him perform anal sex on
her. The episode included numerous conversations about the issue amongst the various personalities on the show. In almost all
cases, they used the euphemism “back door” and “back-dooring
it” to refer to the act. In one scene, Kourtney used a carrot and
chocolate donut to simulate the act, following which Scott used a
cucumber and a candy gummy ring. In another scene, Kourtney
read a text message that she received from Scott, “Knock, knock.
Who’s there? It’s my penis knocking on your back door.”
[…]
LAW CAN BE FUN!
The CBSC received a complaint about the episode on October 23.
The complainant’s concern was that the discussions about anal
sex were not appropriate for broadcast in the afternoon or early
evening. E! responded on November 6, noting that “the sexual
act itself is not explicitly described [...]; rather, the subject is
addressed through euphemisms”. The station did acknowledge,
however, that “the episode should have been accompanied by
a viewer advisory specifying mature content” and that “steps
have been taken to correct the oversight.” The complainant filed
his Ruling Request on November 6, reiterating his view that the
program should not be on during the day and that an advisory is
not sufficient to prevent children from watching it. (The full text
of all correspondence can be found in Appendix B.)
Sometimes you need a reminder that the law is hilarious. This
week I was made aware of Decision 13/14-0242, 2014 CBSC 2
(CanLII), arguably the greatest decision to join the formidable
Canadian jurisprudential canon in the past three years. The
masterpiece can be found at http://canlii.ca/t/g35xf .. And, well,
here’s the start:
***
Anyhow, the point is that the next time you think you don’t have
a future in law or can’t see yourself doing the corporate thing
– remember, someone needs to check whether or not Keeping
Up with the Kardashians is keeping up with Canada’s broadcast
standards!
CANADIAN BROADCAST STANDARDS COUNCIL
NATIONAL SPECIALTY SERVICES PANEL
E! re Keeping Up with the Kardashians (“We’re Having a Baby”)
CBSC Decision 13/14-0242
QUID VALENTINES 2015!
Everyone – I’m not on the committee this year so I don’t have
intimate Skit Nite details (but love the interest and questions
I’m getting). There is a Facebook event page, so look up Skit Nite
2015 – it’s March 10th – that I know for sure!
A. Noël (Chair), M. Arpin, B. Roberts, P. Sévigny, L. Todd, R. Waksman
THE FACTS
Keeping Up with the Kardashians is a reality show that follows
the lives of members of the Kardashian-Jenner family, primarily
mother Kris Jenner and her adult daughters Kim, Khloé and Kourtney Kardashian. Each episode features multiple “plotlines” as
the camera crews follow around the various family members as
they go about their lives. Scenes of their daily lives are interspersed with short interview segments in which the personalities
speak directly to the camera and provide commentary on the
activities going on in the episode.
On October 23, 2013 at 4:00 pm, E! broadcast episode 1 of season 8 of the series, entitled “We’re Having a Baby”. E! rated the
episode 14+. It did not provide any viewer advisories.
QN •
10 FEB 2015
• 18
The Quid publishes on February 17th, our publication date
closest to Valentine’s Day, and we want to fill our pages with
love. So, shoot an e-mail to [email protected] with your
valentines. Shout-out a friend or classmate, your secret crush, or
even profess your love for your favourite Prof! Send as many as
you want - we just want to share the joy on this most romantic
day of the year!
Please provide a from and to - either can be anonymous but
please indicate year when known in parenthesis. In addition
to 1L, 2L, 3L, 4L, LLM, DCL, you can also use EXC for exchange
students and SNAIL, if needed. Yes, you can be anonymous! Yes
you can use just your initials! Yes, you can use your full name, if
you want.... just be sure to send something in by Friday, Feb 13th
– Valentine’s Day Eve!
Examples:
From SS (3L) to AJ, MT, RB (3Ls): LOVE YOU GIRLS!!!!! I came to
law school to find my husband, but I’m happy I found my bridesmaids!
From CF (2L) to DH (2L): You were my factum partner… but will
you be my life partner?
From CHARLIE to LLM (anonymous): Next semester, how about…
Theoretical Approaches … to Love?!?
From RS (4) to LP (1L): I’ve got a blank space…. can I write your
name? xoxoxo!
From anonymous (3L) to Prof. Fox-Decent: They really should
take the ‘decent’ out of your name because you’re a total Fox!
From CL (2L) to CP, AL, AM, MAP, CC (2L): Quand je m’endors
contre ton corps, alors je n’ai plus de doute… l’amour existe
encore!
Okay, so that last one is probably over the line, but you get the
picture :-) HAPPY VD Y’ALL!
From CC (2L) to CS (2L): I’m all about that bass. And by ‘bass’ I
mean you. Be my Valentine?
From FL (2L) to MS (1L): You are a special and wonderful person
and I love you!
From: anonymous (?L) to: TB (3L): You are my fire, the one
desire… believe when I say, I want it that way. – Your secret
admirer.
From: anonymous (?L) to RG (2L): PEI sucks, but you rock!
PS: The Quid also welcomes your other love-related submissions
(poems, stories, drawings -- MISSED CONNECTIONS -- whatevs!)
next week. Or, you can hate on Valentine’s Day – that’s cool too.
Maybe I’ll finally get around to publishing that piece I started
about worst dates I went on last semester. The worst ones were
with people in the legal profession – true fact. I mean, the last
thing you want to hear on a first date after “So, do you have any
siblings?” is “What’s your billable?”
Back to the love front, I LOVE THIS PICTURE of my classmates.
You guys are the best! Also: Bonus shout-out to Dean Campbell
in the middle :-)
**MARK YOUR CALENDARS**
Skit Nite 2015 is on March 10th. That`s 28 days, or 2,419,200 seconds, from now.
Come see your friends and colleagues strut their stuff.
QN •
10 FEB 2015
• 19
Can’t get enough Quid?
On est sur Facebook !
Search “Quid Novi – Droit McGill
Law”
or type
www.facebook.com/quidnovi.mcgill.
Add us today – vous ne savez
jamais ce que nous
pourrions mettre en ligne!
Deadline for submissions:
every Thursday at 5pm