QUID NOVI

QUID
NOVI
Journal des étudiant-e-s
en droit de l’université McGill
Published by the McGill Law
Students’ Association
Volume 36, no 10
13 janvier 2015 | January 13, 2015
QUID
NOVI
QUID NOVI
3644 Peel Street
Montréal, Québec H2A 1X1
quid.law@mcgill.ca
http://quid.mcgill.ca/
http://www.quidnovi.ca
EDITORS IN CHIEF
Melissa Cederqvist
Ying Cheng
Nathan Cudicio
IN-HOUSE DIVA EMERITUS
Charlie Feldman
LAYOUT EDITORS
Fortunat Nadima
Sunny Yang
ASSOCIATE REVIEWERS
Pouneh Davar-Ardakani
Kaishan He
Lindsay Little
Elspeth McMurray
Samantha Rudolph
David Searle
Andrew Stuart
Journal des étudiant-e-s
en droit de l’université McGill
McGill Law’s Weekly Student Newspaper
Volume 36, no 10
13 janvier 2015 | January 13, 2015
What’s inside ?
Quel est le contenu ?
ÉDITO3
LA TERREUR ET L’OUBLI 4
JE NE SUIS PAS CHARLIE, #JESUISCANADIENNE
5
THE ABC’S (EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION COMMITTEE)
6
HOW TO READ YOUR GRADES: UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
7
HOW TO READ YOU GRADES: GRADUATE STUDENTS
8
MIDWIFERY AND THE LAW
8
PROGRAMME DE SOUTIEN DES PAIRS EN DROIT
10
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE DALHOUSIE FEMINIST LEGAL ASSOCIATION 11
CANADIAN MINING COMPANIES ABROAD
12
CALL FOR PROPOSALS – STUDENT-INITIATED SEMINARS
13
There is no point to this article
14
POLITIQUE DE PUBLICATION
17
OVERHEADS21
MCGILL LAW MEMES
22
WINTER WORD SEARCH
23
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 : quid.law@mcgill.ca
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
Reflections on The events
of last week
melissa
cederqvist
Acting as editor for this week has been difficult. It has meant
working through feelings of outrage, anger, reflection, and the
painful realization that artists and journalists can never take for
granted the ability to express themselves without fear of punishment. Belief in the fundamental importance of the freedom of
speech motivated me to write this.
On Wednesday of last week eleven people were murdered in
a disgusting attack by two Islamic fundamentalists who stormed
the Paris headquarters of the French satirical magazine Charlie
Hebdo and opened fire. A police officer, who happened to be a
French man of Muslim faith, was also shot by the men as they
fled. Following this four hostages were slain in another brutal
attack at a kosher supermarket on Friday, and Jewish businesses
were told by police to close their doors. [1] It was reported
Saturday that a 24-year-old Malian Muslim employee of the
supermarket had saved customers by hiding them inside the
store’s freezer. [2]
and mere cartoons--no matter how offensive or irreverent--could
alone be responsible for all these fanatical attacks.
Put simply it is not convincing that the average person has
gained anything from these expensive misadventures abroad,
although someone must be benefiting. The International
Business Times reports that the United States has spent $14
million every hour—or $1.6 trillion [7]—since 9/11 on war. [8]
The organization “The Costs of War” has calculated that casualties in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq total between 298,000
and 354,000 with and estimated 60% were civilian casualties.
[9] While people die “over there”, all that we get are terrorist
attacks by madmen which compromise our own safety at home,
and increasingly repressive laws and state surveillance. While we
pay billions of dollars of tax money funding these wars we are
forced to accept unemployment and austerity, and are routinely
made to swallow assaults on our ever-lower standard of living.
One journalist wrote that this massacre has made it clear “that
nowhere in Europe is safe anymore” and “that all the citizens of
France face a new threat—and that includes millions of Muslim citizens who fear a backlash”. [3] This backlash has already
begun with the racist and anti-immigrant National Front party of
Marine Le Pen and other far-right parties in Europe stoking the
fires of racist nationalism. There have been several attacks on
France’s Muslim community including bombs, arson, threats and
gunfire at mosques around the country. [4]
The United States, for instance, has so far wasted enough money on designing one airplane, the F-35, as it would take to buy
every homeless person in America their own personal mansion
($400 billion of a predicted $1.5 trillion eventual cost). [10] Even
the actual human beings risking their lives in these operations—
the soldiers—are routinely thrown under the bus like in Canada
where we’ve seen cuts to veterans’ services and pensions. [11]
[12] It echoes Dwight D. Eisenhower when he said in 1953 that
“every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket
fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger
and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed”. [13]
In the press and on social media some critics have chosen
to focus on the nature of Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons: were they
bigoted and should we make a point of condemning them as we
mourn the journalists? The role of art in society is an important
issue which must be addressed, but in the wake of these attacks
this focus is not timely. No one should have died last week, and
the first issue is terrorism and the ongoing cycle of religious
extremism and violence.
No one should be content with a pattern of burying the dead
and condemning violence every time massacres like Charlie
Hebdo occur, but rather with making sure that we work towards
a future where there are no dead to be buried and the violence
itself is ended. Harsher security measures alone are not a solution. Short of taking away all our civil liberties there is no way to
stop further attacks without addressing the roots of this cycle of
violence and we cannot pretend otherwise.
One necessary response, politically incorrect but on the minds
of many people, is to question decades of Western states’ involvement in overseas wars and ask whether these and the “War
on Terror” have really made us any safer or if they have actually
increased the frequency and ferocity of terrorist attacks at
home. We are repeatedly told by these murderers that they view
their despicable acts as retaliatory, and it has been reported that
one of the Paris attackers was in fact radicalized in part by the
Iraq War. [5] It is not the only factor, there are many more, but
it does ask what effect the dislocation of war has on religious
fundamentalism and our own security. The implications of this
are ”clear and frightening” [6] and demand more than mere outcry followed by silence when these attacks occur. It rejects the
naïve suggestion that somehow a couple of bad religious ideas
Discussion, acknowledgement and action can be healing, and
it goes without saying that students at the faculty are shocked
and disgusted as they try to digest this catastrophe. As the whole
nation of France is in a state of trauma, we must especially
extend support to those French students who are here studying
with us. Furthermore we must condemn the racist rhetoric from
groups trying to cynically coopt this tragedy to divide people
along racial lines. Finally as law students we must defend political and human rights like the right to free speech, which Charlie
Hebdo has come to represent for many people, against attempts
to repress them.
(Citations on page 23)
QN • 13 JAN 2015 • 3
Professor
VINCENT
FORRAY
LA TERREUR ET L’OUBLI
Par delà les gouvernements, les institutions et les partis politiques ; par delà les sociétés, les ordres et les communautés,
l’état de droit ne peut signifier qu’une chose : protéger et donc
privilégier les personnes humaines. Un groupement qui oublie
l’humain devient un système d’oppression. D’organisation politique ou religieuse, il devient terroriste ; de démocratie, il devient
tyrannie. Dans tous les cas, il s’instaure un régime de terreur.
Nous le savons, car l’histoire nous l’a appris : aucune forme
d’association –aucune- n’est à l’abri de pratiquer l’assassinat,
l’extermination, le génocide.
amant.e.s, des humains dans toute leur complexité. Ceux qui les
ont massacrés ne sont pas que djihadistes ou musulmans ou français. Affirmer que tous étaient ou sont des personnes, ce n’est
pas les amalgamer en une somme indécente. C’est au contraire
préserver la possibilité de voir leur singularité et se protéger
contre les régimes de terreur. Car ceux-ci fonctionnent toujours
en ramenant les personnes au groupe auquel on croit avoir le
droit de les assimiler.
L’oubli de la personne humaine, cette perte de conscience de ce
que l’autre est comme moi autorise le recours à la violence. Pour
Mercredi dernier, à Paris, le régime de la terreur a consisté à mas- que cela ne se produise pas, on avait imaginé qu’il fallait déclasacrer et à meurtrir des journalistes, des policiers, des gens. Nous rer, proclamer, ou inscrire dans une Charte, que les personnes
éprouvons l’horreur indicible, celle qu’on ne sait pas dire. Elle se humaines ont des droits et des libertés. On a parfois pensé que
rappellera longtemps à nous, comme cette image abominable
ces droits n’avaient de sens que s’il était possible de garantir
: un homme s’apprêtant à en tuer un autre à terre, les mains
effectivement leur réalisation. Une telle idée a été volontiers
levées et qui, peut-être, supplie l’autre de l’épargner. L’épouvante. décriée, cyniquement ou pas : inutile de promettre ce qu’on ne
La tristesse infinie. La souffrance de ceux qui restent.
peut pas tenir. Il est vrai que la liberté d’expression et le droit à
Et la peur de ce qui est à venir. Depuis une quinzaine d’années,
la vie semblent aujourd’hui de bien pâles abstractions. Mais la
nous voyons se répéter les évènements significatifs des régimes
formulation solennelle de ces droits et libertés de la personne
de terreurs. La liste des attentats est longue depuis ceux de New humaine a une autre finalité : la mémoire. Rappeler à tous, en
York en 2001 jusqu’à ceux de Paris mercredi, en passant par
tous lieux et toujours qu’aucune communauté, quelle qu’elle soit
Ottawa, Bruxelles, Amsterdam ou Madrid. La liste des actes de
ne peut me faire disparaître derrière elle. Et qu’alors, je n’ai pas à
violence conduits par les pouvoirs politiques en place, les popu- craindre l’autre. Il ou elle est comme moi –nous sommes à égalité
lations dressées les unes contre les autres, les guerres civiles au
de droits. Et en même temps, et pour cette raison, il ou elle est
Moyen-Orient ou à l’est de l’Europe, aussi.
toujours différent.e –sa liberté. Je peux alors appeler l’autre
Comment ne pas songer qu’après l’« horrible vingtième siècle»,
«mon frère » ou « ma sœur ». Liberté, égalité, fraternité... Pas si
nous nous trouvons peut-être dans l’abominable vingt-etbête… Mais comment ? En se souvenant.
unième? Comment ne pas craindre que nous soyons à la veille du
moment où toutes les formes d’association qui tissent nos fragiles
démocraties se convertissent, à leur tour, en systèmes d’oppression ?
Le risque est bien réel à partir du moment où l’on prend l’habitude d’intégrer beaucoup trop rapidement les évènements
comme l’assassinat perpétré à Paris dans l’ordre des symboles,
des idées et donc des idéologies. C’est ce qui, déjà, commence à
arriver.
Djihad-démocratie-libertéd’expression-mondemusulman-civilisation-immigration-nous-jesuisCharlie-lesfrançais. Autant de clés
d’interprétation de l’événement deviennent des principes d’association et d’assimilation des individus. Alors, on oublie l’humain,
ou, plus exactement, on le réduit. Les personnes qui sont mortes
n’étaient pas que des caricaturistes, des porte-drapeaux de la
liberté d’expression ou de la démocratie ou de la nation ou de
tout à la fois. Car que dire alors, de ceux qui ne sont pas considérés comme tels et qui, pourtant, ont été aussi assassinés ?
Toutes ces personnes étaient aussi des parents, des ami.e.s, des
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
4
Law II
Soumia
Allalou
JE NE SUIS PAS CHARLIE, #JESUISCANADIENNE
I AM NOT CHARLIE, #IAMCANADIAN
On the morning of January 7, 2015, terrorists carried out an
attack against the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, tragically killing 12 and injuring 11 others. The magazine was targeted because of its controversial cartoons depicting the Prophet
Muhammad (peace be upon him).
First, I would like to express my deepest condolences to the
families and friends of those who lost a loved one during the
incident. Regardless of what the magazine was printing, all forms
of violence are to be condemned. Insults against the Prophet do
not justify such horrific acts.
of these pictures already offends. But when the offense goes
further by insulting the Prophet in the way he is depicted, this is
when Canadians should step in and say that a line must be drawn.
As a society, we have underlying principles to learn to co-exist.
Republishing Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons does nothing but provoke
and create division towards a religious minority. While you can
stand for freedom of expression, there is no room to tolerate the
promotion of islamophobia in our society.
I am Canadian. And as a Canadian, I uphold values of tolerance,
acceptance and co-existence. Je ne suis pas Charlie.
Still, it is important to note that the acts of a few individuals do
not warrant broad generalizations about the entire Muslim population or Islam as a religion. The aftermath of the shootings led
to a new trend on social media trends titled #JeSuisCharlie. This
trend was created to support freedom of speech and expression.
Many news outlets reproduced the offensive cartoons to stand in
solidarity with Charlie Hebdo. Even though the acts of these individuals are to be condemned, this does not excuse the insulting
nature of the cartoons printed by Charlie Hebdo.
Freedom of speech and expression is one of the fundamental
principles entrenched in our Canadian Constitution. Even if
freedom of speech and expression can be limited under certain
circumstances, my argument against Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons
stems beyond this legal analysis. The core of this issue comes at
the intersection between legal and moral realms. There is a key
difference between giving someone the freedom to publish what
they wish, and promoting that work.
Canadians, as a society, uphold certain values which promote
tolerance and acceptance. As a society, we stand against any promotion of racist or sexist publications. These values are entrenched in our constitution from freedom of religion to prohibition
on discrimination based on various grounds. Likewise, Canada has
repeatedly shown its stance against islamophobia. Following the
shooting on Parliament hill, Canadians were quick to note that
the actions of a sole person were not representative of an entire
religion. Canadians from diverse backgrounds have also stepped
in to help clean vandalized mosques. And most recently, the
CBC’s stance against reproducing Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons out of
respect further reinforces tolerance.
The majority of Muslims believe that visual depictions of prophets or God are strictly prohibited to discourage the use of
these images for worship. It is apparent that the very existence
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
5
Professor
shauna
Van Praagh
THE ABC’S OF THE EXAMINATION
AND EVALUATION COMMITTEE
As the winter term begins and law students anticipate receiving
fall term grades, I write in my capacity as Chair of the Law Faculty’s Examination and Evaluation Committee (Members: Professor
Hoi Kong (Associate Dean Academic), Professor Allison Christians,
Ms. Nancy Czemmel (Director, Student Life and Learning), Ms. Léa
Pelletier-Marcotte (LSA), Mr. Luigi Bruno (GLSA)).
The Committee is engaged in two related projects over this
academic year. The first is to improve transparency and communication with respect to evaluation and grading guidelines at the
Faculty. The second, mandated by last year’s Faculty Council,
is to review and make recommendations related to processes,
purposes, and forms of evaluation of student work in the Faculty
of Law. This submission to the Quid is primarily related to the
first; that is, it is meant to share with students the grading
guidelines and standards followed by all course instructors, and
to improve understanding of the “what”, “how” and “why” of
grading and assessment at the Faculty.
reviewed the existing guidelines, clarified them, and insisted on
their application. We let instructors know that course averages
in “small” courses usually go up to a 3.2, with 3.49 as a maximum
upper limit; in “large” courses, averages are expected to go up
to a 3.0, with 3.14 as a maximum upper limit. We also let them
know that course averages usually do not go below 2.7 and would
need special justification to do so. In 2013-2014, reported grades
– reviewed and approved at the Faculty’s “Marks Meeting” at the
end of each session, prior to release to students - showed general
consistency across courses (B average in “large” courses in which
the average is reported on student transcripts; B to B+ in “small”
courses).
What does this insistence on consistency mean for individual
students? When a student receives a “B+” in a large course, that
grade not only signals ‘Very Good” work but also “above average”
work. A “B” grade indicates “Good” work and thus “average”
work in the extraordinary student cohort to which you all belong:
it signals strong knowledge and understanding, the ability to
As you know, work done by BCL/LLB students is assigned a letter synthesize and apply what you’ve learned, and solid development
grade (A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, D, F), with each letter corresponding of capacities underscored throughout a course. For graduate
to an adjective (eg. A-: excellent; B: good, C: competent). For
students (LLM/DCL), work must be “Reasonably Good” (B-) in
the purposes of calculating a class average, or a student’s grade
order to pass a course. For BCL/LLB students, work that indicates
point average, each letter grade is matched to a grade point value “Competence” (in the “C” range) will be sufficient to pass.
(from 0 to 4). For LLM/DCL students, work is also assigned a letter grade but, following university guidelines for graduate studies, Finally, first year law courses and students have a two-step grade
those letters are matched to percentages, and students must
reporting system. The average course grade for work done in the
attain at least a B- grade in order to pass a course.
fall semester, reported to Faculty Council in January, is typically a
“B-”. By the end of year, the average usually goes up to a “B”; in
Instructors are reminded every session that there is no presother words, as is to be expected, the work done by students in
cribed curve or imposed grade distribution for any course. But
first year law courses improves significantly over the year. First
they are expected to submit course averages that comply with
year law professors invest much time and energy providing indivithe parameters set out by Faculty Council and overseen by the
dual and collective commentary and guidance, in order to ensure
Examination and Evaluation Committee. For courses with an
that students understand their grades and learn from the formal
enrolment over 25, the average is expected to fall between a
assessment of their work.
B- to a B; in those courses, the average grade (from all sections
of a course given in one term) appears on your transcript. For
This brings me to a concluding, and probably the most imporcourses with an enrolment of 25 or under, the average is expectant, point with respect to the grading and assessment structure
ted to fall between a B- and a B+; no class average is reported on currently in place at the Faculty. Students expect meaningful
your transcript. Further, instructors teaching different sections of feedback on their work. This is particularly important at the midthe same course are asked to ensure that their class averages are year point in first year, but all students, whether halfway through
closely aligned (within 0.2).
a course or after the course is completed, are invited to review
their exams and assignments in order to better understand the
Why articulate expected class averages? As student members of quality of their work and whether and how it met course requirethe Committee emphasized last year and again this year, consis- ments and the evaluation criteria used by instructors.
tency is important across the courses offered in the Faculty. Over
the past year, and continuing this past fall, the Committee has
The Committee hopes that this description will help students bet-
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
6
ter appreciate the grading and assessment structures currently in
place at the Law Faculty. Léa and Luigi, the student members of
the Committee, will add their perspectives below.
•
•
The range of forms of meaningful feedback (formal and
informal) for students in large and small classes.
Relationship between internal grading systems and
external communication via academic transcripts.
Connections between feedback, assessment, and
grading within faculty-articulated guidelines, and the
development of capacities and knowledge from year to
year in our programs of legal education.
Implications of change for professors, students, and
faculty programs.
As for our second, and major, project of the year – that is,
•
reviewing the processes, purposes and forms of assessment and
evaluation with the objective of providing recommendations tied
to the curricular renewal project at the Faculty – the Committee
has been busy reviewing relevant literature in pedagogy/edu•
cation and learning from a study of systems at comparator law
faculties undertaken on our behalf by Teaching and Learning Services at McGill. The trajectories for inquiry that we are exploring We always welcome ideas – whether through formal consultation
include the following:
or informal conversations. As Committee Chair, I will ensure that
Léa and Luigi have support in turning to you and in incorporating
• Purposes and place of summative and formative modes your input into our continuing work.
of evaluation.
All the best for a very happy 2015 - and for a winter semester full
• Combination and relationship of norm-referenced and
of good challenges and inspired learning!
criterion-referenced assessment systems.
VP Academic
Léa
PelletierMarcotte
HOW TO READ YOUR GRADES:
UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
En ce moment, nous en sommes tous à attendre impatiemment
nos notes de la session dernière. Nous serons nombreux à avoir
l’impression que malgré toutes les heures consacrées à étudier,
lire et rédiger, nos notes semblent figées dans les limbes du
monde académique: the B range. Nous invoquerons cette courbe
(qui n’existe pas), nous nous interrogerons sur nos capacités
à nous trouver un emploi avec ces notes dépourvues d’éclat,
manifestement indignes de nos compétences réelles, nous
deviendrons de plus en plus cyniques (pay your fees, get your
B’s), nous envisagerons quitter le programme, etc. C’est le même
psychodrame à chaque session, aussi prévisible que du verglas,
au Québec, en début d’année.
Un problème fondamental sous-tend notre obsession collective
par rapport aux notes: cette tendance à les laisser nous définir,
et les laisser définir notre expérience à la Faculté. Comme Pr.
Van Praagh l’a mentionné plus haut, nous sommes des étudiants
exceptionnels. Notre simple présence à cette Faculté, que nous
avons choisie mais qui surtout, nous a choisis, en témoigne. Il
ne faut donc pas considérer ces notes comme le seul moyen de
démontrer à l’« autre » nos compétences et notre identité. Les
notes sont un message individuel sur notre cheminement personnel, et devraient être lues ainsi. Le fait que 45 autres personnes
du même cours aient obtenu la même note ne signifie pas que
nous sommes tous semblables, mais que nous avons atteint les
objectifs de manière équivalente (quoique différemment). Il faut
cesser de voir les notes comme seule mesure de notre valeur. Il
serait faux de prétendre que les notes ne sont pas importantes
pour plusieurs opportunités académiques ou professionnelles.
Or, elles ne seront jamais considérées en isolation avec le reste
de nos compétences et de nos expériences. Les notes sont avant
tout un indicateur personnel, à être lues au regard d’un contexte
et de circonstances que l’ « autre », bien souvent, ne connaît pas
ou ne peut connaître.
Ainsi, ne laissez pas les notes et les attentes d’un hypothétique «
employeur » dicter le cours de votre expérience à la Faculté: prenez des cours qui vous intéressent, prenez des risques (comme
prendre des cours dans votre langue seconde), n’ayez pas peur de
vous impliquer dans des activités qui ne sont pas « académiques
», voyagez, impliquez-vous dans votre communauté, prenez du
temps pour vous, sortez le nez dehors et profitez de la vie culturelle de cette ville. Cultivez l’individu que vous êtes au-delà de
vos notes, car sans lui, même un bout de papier criblé de « A » ne
veut rien dire.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
7
GLSA
HOW TO READ YOUR GRADES:
GRADUATE STUDENTS
Luigi
Bruno
On January 16th, grades will be released for the Fall semester on
Minerva. Many graduate students, especially those like me who
are not familiar with the McGill grading system, will be wondering
how to read and interpret the grades they have just received. In
this regard, and for the purposes of clarification, it is useful to
pinpoint briefly the rules behind graduate grading.
As Prof. Van Praagh mentioned, LL.M./D.C.L. students must
receive a minimum of B- in order to successfully complete a
course. Our work is graded with a letter which, in line with a
University-wide policy, corresponds to a given percentage. These
percentages are set as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Instructors are reminded of this Policy by means of a Grading
Memo circulated by the Chair of the Examination & Evaluation
Committee shortly before the end of each term. The Memo
contains the guidelines that are necessary to ensure fairness and
transparency in the grading process.
There may be some confusion within the LL.M./D.C.L. community
regarding the evaluation of graduate students in any class that is
shared with LL.B/B.C.L. students, considering the different failing
thresholds in the grading system. On this point, the Grading
Memo explicitly mentions that the work of Undergraduate and
Graduate students has to be marked separately in order to delineate the different grading scales.
A : 85 – 100%;
A-: 80 – 84%;
B+: 75 – 79%;
B : 70 – 75%;
B-: 65 – 69%;
F: Anything below 65% (Failure).
MCGILL
JOURNAL
OF LAW AND
HEALTH
MIDWIFERY AND THE LAW:
PERSPECTIVES FROM ONTARIO AND QUEBEC
The MJLH is pleased to invite you for light lunch and a presenLe lundi 19 janvier 2015, la Revue de droit et santé de McGill sera
tation on midwifery and the intersecting legal issues of liability,
l’hôte d’une table ronde intitulée «La pratique sage-femme et le
regulation and access to midwifery care on Monday, January 19th droit: perspectives de l’Ontario et du Québec».
2015.
La RDSM vous invite cordialement à partager la collation et à
Perspectives will be shared by Marie-Ève St-Laurent (Ordre des
assister aux présentations de nos invitées, Marie-Ève St-Laurent
sages-femmes du Quebec) and Cara Wilkie (Association of Onta- (Ordre des sages-femmes du Québec) et Cara Wilkie (Association
rio Midwives).
des sages-femmes de l’Ontario) qui échangeront leurs points de
vue sur les enjeux juridiques de la pratique sage-femme en ce
The event will begin at 1:00pm, at the McGill Faculty of Law.
qui a trait à la responsabilité civile, à la régulation et à l’accès aux
soins offerts par les sages-femmes.
Time: 1:00pm - 2:30pm
Location: New Chancellor Day Hall, Room 312
L’évènement se tiendra dès 13h, à la Faculté de droit de l’université McGill.
Heure: 13h – 14h30
Lieu: Faculté de droit de l’université McGill, Pavillon New Chancellor Day, local 312
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
8
Marie-ève
St-Laurent
Ordre des Sages-femmes
du Québec
Cara
Wilkie
Association of
Ontario Midwives
Midwifery
and the Law
Perspectives
from Ontario
and Quebec
An introductory
conversation on midwifery
and legal issues, such as
liability, regulation and
access to midwifery care.
Lunch will be provided
Faculty of Law
McGill University
NCDH Room 312
Monday, January 19th
1:00 – 2:30 pm
LANCEMENT OFFICIEL DU
PROGRAMME DE SOUTIEN DES PAIRS EN DROIT /
LAW PEER TO PEER SUPPORT PROGRAM
peer to
peer
The members of the Law Peer to Peer Support Program are
looking forward to meeting you.Trained during the Fall 2014
semester, the students participating in the program are available
to answer any questions or concerns you may have regarding…
anything! Personal questions, program-related questions, or to
just sit and chat – the Law Peer to Peer Support Program is there
for you. Stop by during office hours or send your questions by
email to: peer.law@mcgill.ca.
registration and are aware of campus resources available to
them. The Peer to Peer members are dedicated to supporting
their fellow law students, while ensuring that any information
that is shared is entirely confidential.
Pourquoi devenir membre?
Devenir membre du Programme de soutien des pairs en droit
vous donne la chance d’acquérir de l’expérience en tant que
bénévole, tout en rencontrant d’autres étudiants et étudiantes
en droit. En aidant vos pairs, vous pouvez ainsi développer vos
compétences en leadership et en communication. To apply for
the program for the 2015-2016 year, fill out the application form
on the program’s website and send it to SAO.law@mcgill.ca along
with your CV by May 1, 2015. If you have any questions about the
program and want to hear from a current member about their
experience, email peer.law@mcgill.ca!
“I have loved being involved with the Peer to Peer Support Program because I really enjoy talking to my peers about anything
and everything to do with their law school experiences. Being a
member of the Program has enabled me to support my colleagues and provided me with the resources to do so. I have learned
so much about the many resources available to students and
attended many trainings and workshops and gained valuable
skills which will be useful in the future”.
Who can seek support from the McGill Law Peer to Peer Support Program?
Any McGill Law student can seek support from any member of
the McGill Law Peer to Peer Support Program. Tout étudiant et
Drop-in hours for the Winter 2015 term begin the week of January étudiante en droit de McGill, peu importe son année, est invité à
12:
communiquer avec tout membre du Programme de soutien des
pairs.
• Mercredi de 13h00 à 14h30, NCDH 203
• Jeudi de 11h30 à 13h00, NCDH 203
Pourquoi rechercher le soutien d’un membre du Programme de
soutien des pairs?
Exceptions: Thursdays from 11:30am-12:30pm in NCDH 203 only Members of the McGill Law Peer to Peer Support Program are
on January 15 & from January 29 to February 19.
Law students who have been in Law School for at least one year.
They can relate to and are familiar with the Law School expeApply Now to Join the 2015-2016 Team!
rience at McGill. They can assist other Law students to navigate
the McGill law environment and discuss possible options to a
For information on the role and responsibilities of a member of
variety of questions based on their own experiences and based
the Peer to Peer Support Program, and information on how to
on the training they have received. If they don’t have the inforapply for the program, please see https://www.mcgill.ca/law-stu- mation you need, they will be happy to refer you to a McGill
dies/student-life-learning/law-peer-peer-support-program
service that can help.
What is the McGill Law Peer to Peer Support Program?
The McGill Law Peer to Peer Support Program is a group of
dedicated law students who provide support to other McGill
Law students in a way that is complementary to the support
offered by the Law SAO. The students support their peers by
helping them navigate academic and student life in the Faculty
of Law and in the greater McGill community. Chaque étudiant et
étudiante assiste à des sessions de formation obligatoires afin
de mieux soutenir leurs camarades. They are trained to support
students on issues concerning course and degree information,
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
10
- Stacey Smydo, Law Peer to Peer Support Program,
2014-2015
FEMINIST
COLLECTIVE
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE DALHOUSIE
FEMINIST LEGAL ASSOCIATION
This letter was sent on January 7, 2015. It was published online by The Coast, a
Halifax newspaper.
We are troubled by your recent Statement (28 December 2014)
in support of the Dalhousie administration’s decision to pursue a
restorative justice approach in response to the School of Dentistry scandal. Restorative justice is a powerful tool which, when
used properly, can achieve positive, transformative outcomes.
However, when used improperly, it further entrenches negative
power dynamics, trivializes wrongs, and causes greater trauma to
victims. We believe that Dalhousie’s current approach to restorative justice in the context of the School of Dentistry scandal has
the potential to do the latter. Furthermore, we are disturbed by
the lack of clear protection for those making formal complaints
under Dalhousie’s Code of Student Conduct and Sexual Harassment Policy; this absence has silenced women who may otherwise have made formal complaints.
Contrary to the impression given in your Statement on Misogyny at Dalhousie Dentistry School, restorative justice does not
automatically guarantee autonomy to all involved. The lack of
clear protection to those making a formal complaint under Dalhousie’s Code of Student Conduct and Sexual Harassment Policy
is a major barrier to their true agency. Under both codes it is
currently unclear whether or not students may make anonymous
formal complaints. Recently, the four Dalhousie professors who
submitted a formal complaint against the “Class of DDS 2015
Gentlemen”, originally with a request for confidentiality, have
gone public after the university’s “unexplained delays” in responding to their complaint. The professors assert, and we agree, that
no student “should bear the negative consequences for having
submitted a formal complaint” (3 January 2015). The only way
the female dentistry students can presently be certain that they
will not bear negative academic, reputational, and emotional
consequences for coming forward is to “choose” the informal
complaint process, which in this case has meant restorative
justice.
As you recognized in your Statement, some of these women were
not originally consulted on the issue of restorative justice. Therefore, when Dr. Florizone announced that “the women involved”
had chosen restorative justice, he removed the agency of these
women and nearly silenced them. In addition to the pressures
mentioned above, now that Dr. Florizone has publicly stated that
“the women involved” chose restorative justice, the pressure to
fall into line has become intense. Four of the impacted women
have recently written an open letter to Dr. Florizone rejecting the
use of restorative justice for this issue. They explain that they
have serious concerns about the impact of filing formal complaints on their academic success and futures and state that “no
individual woman in [their] class should be required to advance a
formal complaint in her own name, or to participate as a witness”
as the university has all the information required to initiate an
investigation (6 January 2015). Finally, they make it clear that the
decision between restorative justice and filing a formal complaint
is a false choice.
We urge you to speak against this oppression. As feminists in
the legal profession, we urge you to support all of the women of
Dalhousie dentistry, not just those who have chosen the restorative justice process. We further urge you to help empower these
women and all victims of harassment at Dalhousie by advocating
that none of the response options available to them carry even
the possibility of victim endangerment. We urge you to advocate
for changes to Dalhousie’s Code of Student Conduct and Sexual
Harassment Policy so that complainants are fully protected. Restorative justice is meant to provide healing, not to deepen harms,
and it can only be effective if it is not seen as the only “safe”
option. We urge you to stand against the abuse of restorative justice by your university. By advocating for an anonymous and safe
complaints process, you will promote the proper administration
of justice at Dalhousie. We urge you to stand with the over 150
Dalhousie faculty members who have requested an independent
inquiry. Finally, we urge you to stand with the four Dalhousie professors who have made a formal complaint and the four women
of the dentistry class who have called for this complaint to be
taken seriously.
A student considering making a formal complaint without
guaranteed protection of her identity risks reprisals from any
vigilante with a computer and time on his hands. In this case,
public knowledge of a complaining dentistry student’s identity
could lead to an extension of the electronic harassment she has
already faced at the hands of her colleagues. She also knows that
if her name becomes public she may face violent reprisals and
Sincerely,
discrimination years from now if she ever opens a practice under
her own name.
The Feminist Collective of McGill Law Students
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
11
Law IV
OP-ED: CANADIAN MINING COMPANIES
ABROAD – OUT OF OUR JURISDICTION?
JOHN
SIMPSON
When it comes to taking responsibility for wrongs committed,
environments destroyed, and human rights violated by Canadian
mining companies operating in foreign jurisdictions, Canada has
classically taken the easy way out: ignoring them. The classic argument is that Canada doesn’t want to infringe on the territorial
sovereignty of a foreign State by imposing Canadian regulation
in another State and, by so doing, infer that local standards are
inferior. While the territorial sovereignty of independent States is,
without a doubt, a serious principle of international law, it flies in
the face of common sense to allow it to be used as a ‘corporate
veil’ manipulated in order to allow multinational corporations to
exploit the weak regulatory regimes which territorial sovereignty
purports to safeguard.
Both the Nationality and the Territoriality principles of establishing jurisdiction give Canada the opportunities it needs.
The Nationality principle establishes jurisdiction based on the
nationality of the author of the wrong. For corporations, this is
based on, among other things, where the corporation is incorporated and where its main place of management is located.1 Well,
you smart law students might ask, what happens if the Canadian
mining corporation operates through a subsidiary incorporated
in the local jurisdiction of the operation or elsewhere? It’s a good
argument, I admit, to which the emerging doctrine of Corporate Enterprise Theory offers only partial answers. The Court of
King’s Bench allowed a more constrained version of Corporate
Enterprise Theory to occur in Stone and Knight Ltd. v. Birmingham Corp.2 Although not widely accepted, Corporate Enterprise
Theory combined with the Nationality principle could ground
jurisdiction in Canada.
All this is to say that Canada has options, but they are being
ignored. In 2011, Conciencia Solidaria filed a complaint with the
Canadian embassy in Argentina over Barrick Gold’s destruction
of the Pascua Lama glaciers. In 2009, the Canadian embassy
supported Blackfire Resources in its mining operations in Chiapas,
Mexico, even after a local activist protesting the mine, Mariano
Abarca, was murdered.4 In 2011, Bill C-300 was introduced in the
House of Commons, which proposed standards of conduct for
Canadian companies abroad and gave the Canadian government
the authority to investigate complaints of noncompliance. It also
foresaw the regulation of the economic, political, and diplomatic
support that Canada gives Canadian companies abroad and made
that support conditional on the respect of the above standards.5
The Bill was, unfortunately, defeated thanks to intense lobbying,
by a vote of 140-134.
Sovereignty is a weak excuse for allowing Canada’s mining corporations to exploit natural resources in underdeveloped and vulnerable areas of the world. If Canada is unwilling to take jurisdiction
over the wrongs that these corporations commit, then at the very
least it must stop actively supporting them.
Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co. Case (Belgium v Spain),
[1970] I.C.J. Rep. 3.
The Territoriality principle rests on the position that the State on 2 Smith, Stone and Knight Ltd v Birmingham Corp., [1939] 4
whose territory a wrong is committed should have jurisdiction
All E.R. 116 (see the decision at: http://www.uniset.ca/other/
over it. The Supreme Court of Canada has followed this principle pollypeck/19394AER116.html).
3
in listing a number of scenarios in which Canada’s courts can
Club Resorts Ltd. v van Breda, [2012] 1SCR 572.
4
prima facie exercise jurisdiction:
Working Group on Mining and Human Rights in Latin America,
“The Impact of Canadian Mining in Latin America and Canada’s
1. Where the defendant is domiciled or resident in Canada; Responsibility,” Executive Summary of the Report submitted to
2. Where the defendant carries on business in Canada;
the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (presented by
3. Where the wrong was committed in Canada; or
Daniel Cerqueira at the Canadian Council on International Law’s
4. Where a contract connected to the wrong was made in Conference, Ottawa, November 14, 2014), at 27-28 [Executive
Canada.
Summary].
Check out the Bill and more info on the topic here: http://
This is not a closed list.3 In Quebec, of course, we turn to the
openparliament.ca/bills/40-3/C-300/ (accessed November 24,
Civil Code of Quebec (CCQ arts 3134-3168). So, technically, an
2014); see also Executive Summary, ibid, at 29.
5
argument for jurisdiction could be made based on the fact that
Check out the Bill and more info on the topic here: http://
the decision to finance the mining project that resulted in human openparliament.ca/bills/40-3/C-300/ (accessed November 24,
rights violations was made in Canada by a Canadian corporation. 2014); see also Executive Summary, ibid, at 29.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
12
1
student
affairs
office
CALL FOR PROPOSALS –
STUDENT-INITIATED SEMINARS
Objectives
The student-initiated seminar is a vehicle that is available for
students to propose, organise, and run their own seminars, under
the supervision of a Faculty member. The objectives of this vehicle are the following: to give students an opportunity to reflect
on teaching and learning and to be involved in course design; to
provide space for experimenting with innovative teaching and
learning strategies; and to provide opportunities to participate
in learning environments that are less hierarchical than many
courses, particularly lecture courses, tend to be.
Application procedure
Students are invited to submit an application for student-initiated
seminars to be offered in the 2015-16 academic year. The deadline for submission is 10 March 2015 at 17:00.
Proposals are to be submitted to the Student Affairs Office (sao.
law@mcgill.ca).
Two proposals will be selected for the upcoming academic year.
séminaire doivent y participer de façon active. Les animateurs
pourront, par exemple, demander aux étudiants de mener la
discussion à tour de rôle. Le rôle des animateurs n’est pas celui
du professeur dans le cadre d’un cours magistral.
Ordinarily, convenors must have a CGPA of at least 2.7.
Students interested in convening a student-initiated seminar are
encouraged to register in the Legal Education Seminar.
Le Secrétariat des études en droit (SED)
Tous les règlements et politiques habituels s’appliques aux séminaires initiés par les étudiants. Les animateurs sont fortement
encouragés à collaborer étroitement avec le SED pour tout ce qui
concerne les aspects administratifs du séminaire.
Evaluation
The course is evaluated on a pass/fail basis. The supervisor has
ultimate responsibility for assigning marks. However, it is possible
to opt for a peer evaluation process in which comments and feedback are given by students on each other’s work.
The content of proposals is described below.
If peer evaluation is employed, the course convenors, in conjunction with the supervisor, must develop marking templates or
guidelines and map out the process through which peer evaluaLes propositions sont rédigées, et les séminaires organisés et
tion is to proceed. A decision must be made as to whether the
animés par des équipes de 2 ou 3 étudiants (les « animateurs »), evaluation will be anonymous; whether students will submit their
sous la supervision d’un membre de la Faculté (le « superviseur
work to one other student or to the larger group for evaluation;
»). Les animateurs des séminaires peuvent s’inscrire à un cours
and how comments and feedback will be communicated. Convede 2 crédits (à titre provisionnel, nous nous servons du véhicule
nors who opt for peer evaluation are strongly advised to consult
‘Group Assistants’) pendant la session qui précède la présentation Teaching and Learning Services for advice and guidance.
du séminaire, afin de préparer le séminaire, la liste de lectures, le
site internet pour le cours, les méthodes d’évaluation, la planiPeer evaluation should not result in the awarding of marks or the
fication préliminaire des sessions, et de faire tout autre travail
ranking of assignments.
préparatoire qui s’impose.
Proposal outline
Rôles
Proposals must contain the following elements:
Le superviseur / Supervisor
Le superviseur agit comme personne-ressource pour les anima1. Course title, course description, and learning objectives
teurs et les autres étudiants inscrits au séminaire. Normalement,
(50-100 words);
il ou elle n’assistera pas au séminaire. Il ou elle aidera les anima2. Name of supervisor (must be a Faculty member), accomteurs à préparer le plan du cours, la liste de lectures, la méthode
panied by a communication from the supervisor stating
d’évaluation ainsi que les stratégies d’enseignement.
that s/he has agreed to take on this role (the supervisor
may communicate directly with the Associate Dean
Les animateurs / Convenors
(Academic) and SAO);
Les animateurs sont responsables du déroulement du sémi3. List of student convenors and year of study;
naire. Toutefois, il est entendu que tous les étudiants inscrits au
4. Brief description of the nature of the work that the
Crédits octroyés pour la préparation du séminaire.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
13
student convenors will perform, with a description of the
division of labour (a few sentences);
5. A list of the major topics to be covered and sections into
which the semester will be divided, if applicable (1/2
page)
a) Note: A detailed course outline is not required
at this time;
6. A proposed method of evaluation (about one paragraph)
a) Indicate the type of method(s) of evaluation
proposed (e.g. participation, written assignment, examination, etc.
b) Provide a brief rationale for the method(s) of
evaluation selected
c) University regulations stipulate that a final
examination cannot be worth more than 75%;
optional assignments are permitted;
7. A brief description of the course format and an indication of the types of teaching and learning techniques
and strategies that will be used, along with a rationale
(100 words)
a) Preference will be given to proposals that show
evidence of research and reflection on teaching
and learning. Innovations in teaching strategies
and approaches are strongly encouraged;
8. Curricula vitae of all convenors.
In-House Diva
CHARLIE
FELdman
There is no point to this article
It’s Thursday morning and I’m on a bus to Ottawa. Having checked
the trusty Quid Novi inbox and seeing little in there for the next
edition I resolve to write something. Heck, I have two hours to
kill and my only on-bus plan was to catch up on Grey’s Anatomy.
(Go ahead and judge - I’ve been watching since Season 1 and yes,
it turned weird with Izzie having sex with the ghost of her dead
ex-husband in Season 5 or whatever, but I feel that since I’ve watched 10 seasons already I might as well get my act together and
see what’s going on in number 11… anywho… ).
Okay, so, why am I on this bus? Well, funny story, I was on
another bus last week in the Middle East and feel asleep – and
woke up with no wallet. It was delightful. The problem is that I’m
leaving for the US soon and will need my diver’s license, so off to
Service Ontario I go for a temporary one.
Wait, Charlie­- you live in Quebec, what are you doing with an
Ontario license!?! TIME FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS
LAW FUN! Obviously, I want to comply with the law in Quebec
– so, when I moved back here at the start of the fall semester I
made the phone call to schedule an appointment to exchange
my license. Since I’m a Permanent Resident of Canada, Quebec
apparently wants my full driving history and unlike you citizen folk
I can’t just do a simple exchange.
letter that for dramatic effect I began “Greetings and salutations.”
(Okay, so maybe that was inspired by recently re-watching the
80s classic Heathers). Sadly, my letter went with out a response…
or so I thought.
Apparently this special thing I need can only be mailed to the
address on my driver’s license. Fine, I think, ‘I have mail forwarding!’ Not so fast, I find out later. Their mail is marked ‘Do not
forward’. So, to recap – Quebec needs me to get something from
Ontario that Ontario won’t send to me in Quebec. I love my adopted country, I really do.
Okay, people, what do I do? Violate the law in Quebec by not
having a Quebec license? Violate the law in Ontario by giving
the address of a friend and pretending I live there so I can get a
history form sent there and then do the exchange? Thankfully
I don’t have a car here so I don’t have to worry that much, but
still… should something happen if I rent one I’d rather not be
afoul of the statute book.
This is where I wish there were some sort of ombudsman
for dumb administrative clusterfudges. It reminds me of this
beautiful experience I had every semester in college. (Note: I
sometimes get weird looks at the Faculty when I say ‘college’ – I
went to what y’all would call ‘University’. I don’t know why y’all
Fine, no big deal. OR SO I THOUGHT! Apparently, the regular On- gotta be educationally judgmental like that, but UNIVERSITY OF
tario driving history you can request online just won’t do – rather, MARYLAND REPRESENT!). Okay, so, the problem at UMD was as
I need some special thing I actually have to request IN WRITING. follows: I majored in Government and Politics (what the rest of
IN WRITING? Like, letter, envelope, stamp – I felt like a friggin pio- the world would call Political Science, but we had to be different
neer woman marching to the nearest Canada Post box with this
for no reason) and French.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
14
a few times.
Herein was the academic administrative clusterfudge: French
was in the Department of Arts and Humanities; Government and
Politics had its home in the Department of Behavioral and Social
Sciences. The Humanities people had apparently been freaked
out at the low number of students actually graduating on time,
so they required mandatory advising each and every semester
to ensure you were on track. (This is particularly annoying if you
took classes in summer and winter terms in addition to fall and
spring – as I did to graduate early. FOUR TIMES A YEAR I HAD TO
BE ‘ADVISED’) For its part, Social Sciences only required annual
advising, but alas, Humanities would not approve your schedule
for the next semester without first having notice from Social
Sciences that you were on track with your primary major. … And,
as I found out the hard way, Social Sciences wouldn’t approve
anything without first making sure you were on track with Humanities.
After running across campus repeatedly (McGill’s downtown
campus, according to Wikipedia, is 79 acres. UMD is 1250 acres
– 5km2) and getting nowhere, I finally solved my problem with
some In-House Diva thinking. I scheduled both advising appointments at the same time, got to Social Sciences and pretended
my phone was vibrating in my pocket (“Sorry, can you hold on a
sec – this might be important”) and then busted “Hey! I’m just in
my Social Sciences advising session – can I put you on speaker?”)
YEAH, THAT’S RIGHT. “I just felt like it was time for y’all to talk”.
Boom. Problem solved. To cite Puff Daddy (I think), as he then
was (I think) “Some have hopes and dreams – I got ways and
means.”
Yes, I was asked to leave the lecture hall in my undergrad days.
Apparently you can’t show up with a popcorn maker to a threehour attendance-mandatory class and when the Prof asks what
you’re doing say, “Well, I figured there was no point being both
bored AND hungry…” True story. Also, context: This was maybe 10
minutes before class was to start, and the girl with the large laptop screen in front of me agreed to put on a movie with subtitles
so we could at least have 2/3rds of class be enjoyable… I felt like
it was the start of a beautiful in-class solidarity movement. In that
regard, I will never understand why they make the most boring
classes attendance-mandatory. Anywho, Prof. Coyle aka Mr.
Elbowpatches was all “Young man, you need to leave” and I was
all “BUT IMMA STILL GET MY ATTENDANCE MARKED, RIGHT?”
Prof. Coyle stood there expressionless, and – well, I was in true
form that day so I followed it up to everyone with “I know all y’all
see me up in here!” as I packed up my stuff as loudly as possible.
From what I recall, the cupcakes at the dining hall were extra
excellent that evening and I was back home just in time to watch
The Real World: San Diego (the first one... in 2004). Oh, and I got
an A- in that class!
Anywho, I thought my solution to the advising problem was
creative. Sadly, I don’t have any creative solutions to my present
dilemma. It’s like how, while in the Middle East last week, I tried
to solve Mid-East peace. I mean, Twerking for Treaties felt like
a good initiative. Nobody really responded, let alone wanted to
fund it. Why does nobody like my ideas? I have excellent ideas!
Like, that changing a driver’s license should be simple. Maybe
the best is yet to come – I mean, I’m likely moving back to Ontario
later this year. For all I know I’ll find out they need some Quebec
form that I can only get by providing a blood sample and my firstborn’s umbilical cord.
As a side note of interest to nobody except me (and provided in
an effort to fill more space in the Quid) my actual French major
stream was cancelled during my 2nd year, causing this great life
situation wherein my transcript and diploma indicate different
degree programs. Technically, I can proudly say I was the last
That thought alone will keep me warm all winter long. Happy
“French for International Business” graduate of the University. I
Semester, y’all!
try to tell myself the academic program wasn’t discontinued on
my account but I can’t really be sure… I did get kicked out of class
Happy New Year from the Quid Team!
Left to right: Charlie, Ying, Melissa and Nathan.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
15
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
16
THE
EDITORs-INCHIEF
POLITIQUE DE PUBLICATION
Before getting to the Quid`s publication policy, which is reprinted once every semester, please
note some gentle reminders and happy news from your friendly neighbourhood editors-in-chief.
• Please submit final versions of your articles at or before the Thursday 5PM deadline.
This allows your article to be better intergrated into that week’s edition while also
increasing the likelihood that typos and the like will be caught before publishing.
• The Quid is now even more accessible! Each edition will now also be available as a Word
document, thereby allowing for text-to-speech capabilities. Please contact us for more
information.
• Write to us. This is your newspaper therefore please feel free to share your thoughts.
Need ideas? Take a look at old Quids available on our archives: www.quidnovi.ca/index.php/fr/archives. Whether silly or
serious, written or drawn, we’d love to see it.
• If you would like someone to offer confidential feedback on a maybe-for-the-Quid project, please contact us.
Lorsque c’est possible, le Quid publie toutes les contributions
qu’il reçoit. Cependant, dans le but de favoriser un climat où
chaque étudiant sera confortable d’exprimer ses opinions, les
rédacteurs-en-chef se réservent le droit de modifier des articles
ou même, dans des circonstances rares, de les refuser. Ce pouvoir
sera exercé à la discrétion des rédacteurs-en-chef.
Nous présumons que toutes les contributions sont dignes de
publication. Néanmoins, des propos potentiellement criminels
(i.e. le discours de haine) et des propos diffamatoires ne bénéficient pas de cette présomption. Dans de tels cas, l’auteur doit
démontrer de façon probante que les informations contenues
dans sa contribution sont véridiques et que les principes de la
déontologie journalistique ont été suivis. La décision de publier
ces articles relève uniquement des rédacteurs-en-chef.
POLITIQUES ET PRINCIPES D’OPÉRATION DU QUID NOVI
Principes généraux
Politique de contribution et de révocation
Politique de contribution anonyme
Politique de correction
Politique de révision du contenu
Procédures de préavis et d’amendement
1) PRINCIPES GÉNÉRAUX
Chaque item apparaissant dans le Quid Novi est un article d’opinion qui reflète uniquement le point de vue de la personne ou
des personnes qui ont écrit l’item. Ni le Quid Novi, ni l’AÉD, ni la
Faculté de droit n’endosse les opinions contenues dans les contributions publiées. Étant donné la nature de cette publication et
ses ressources limitées, le Quid ne s’engagera pas dans la vérification de la véracité factuelle des contributions.
Les contributions sont présumées dignes de publication, à moins
de ne pas se conformer aux principes énumérés ici.
Le Quid appartient aux étudiants de la Faculté de droit de l’Université McGill. Il est donc essentiel qu’il suive des politiques et
principes transparents, qui prennent en considération la valeur de
la liberté d’expression ainsi que les intérêts des étudiants et des
professeurs. Les politiques et les principes d’opération sont exposés ci-bas. Les questions et commentaires s’y rapportant peuvent
être adressés à : quid.law@mcgill.ca. Cette politique est mise à
jour à la discrétion des rédacteurs-en-chef, à la seule condition
qu’un préavis de la mise à jour soit publiée dans le Quid.
2) POLITIQUE DE CONTRIBUTION ET DE RÉVOCATION
Le Quid est une publication qui survit grâce aux contributions.
La date limite pour les contributions apparaîtra dans chaque
numéro. Les articles soumis doivent contenir le nom de l’auteur
ainsi que son année d’étude. Si l’auteur écrit dans un rôle particulier (i.e. “Président de l’AÉD”; “Président d’un club étudiant”), ceci
doit également être indiqué.
Ce document contient six sections :
Les articles soumis pour publication peuvent être révoqués par
Aucun item soumis après la date limite ne sera publié sans le
consentement explicite des rédacteurs-en-chef. Les contributions
Cette version de la politique s’applique depuis 2010. Sa traduction tardives seront conservées et publiées dans le numéro subséfrançaise date de 2011.
quent.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
17
l’auteur, du moment que cette requête soit faite au moins deux
jours avant la publication du numéro en question. Le Quid fera de
son mieux pour faire suite à une requête tardive, mais il n’arrêtera pas la publication d’un numéro qui est déjà en impression.
3) POLITIQUE DE CONTRIBUTION ANONYME
Le Quid publiera des articles anonymes, à la condition que ceuxci se conforment à ses politiques et principes d’opération. Les
articles anonymes présentent un défi particulier pour la révision
du contenu, car ils ne permettent pas aux rédacteurs-en-chef de
consulter avec l’auteur. Ainsi, si un article anonyme est refusé, un
avis de refus doit être publié dans le Quid.
4) POLITIQUE DE CORRECTION
Chaque item soumis au Quid sera révisé. Le Quid se réserve le
droit de faire des modifications grammaticales afin d’améliorer
la présentation et la lisibilité d’un article. Les rédacteurs peuvent
également corriger les fautes d’orthographe. Si une contribution nécessite des modifications importantes, dans l’avis de la
personne qui le révise, ceci sera indiqué aux rédacteurs-en-chef.
Ceux-ci peuvent refuser de publier l’article ou bien effectuer des
modifications importantes pour ensuite le publier. Les modifications mineures ne sont pas nécessairement communiquées à
l’auteur avant la publication.
5) POLITIQUE DE RÉVISION DU CONTENU
Toutes les contributions au Quid seront révisées au niveau du
contenu. Il existe un processus de révision comportant quatre
étapes.
1. Révision par le rédacteur
Le rédacteur ou rédacteur-en-chef chargé de la révision
d’un article accomplit cette tâche en vérifiant s’il contient
du contenu contestable. Le contenu contestable dénote du
contenu que le rédacteur en question juge comme potentiellement offensant ou autrement inadéquat pour la publication. Les facteurs suivants seront considérés lors de l’évaluation du potentiel offensant: le ton général de la contribution,
les mots précis utilisés dans leur contexte précis, ainsi qu’une
appréciation de la réaction potentielle du corps étudiant,
des professeurs, des anciens étudiants et de la communauté
juridique montréalaise. Si le rédacteur individuel estime que
le contenu est contestable, il communique ceci aux rédacteurs-en-chef.
(moins deux sur trois parmi le rédacteur et les rédacteursen-chef), l’article procède à l’étape de la consultation. S’il
n’existe pas un tel consensus, l’article est publié comme tel
ou avec des modifications portées à la discrétion des rédacteurs-en-chef.
3. Consultation
Au stade de la consultation, les rédacteurs-en-chef doivent
aviser l’auteur qu’il existe des préoccupations au niveau du
contenu. Les rédacteurs-en-chef peuvent consulter d’autres
individus au sujet de la contribution, à la condition de ne
fournir aucune information permettant d’identifier l’auteur.
Les rédacteurs peuvent consulter avec des individus mentionnés dans l’article, d’autres étudiants, des professeurs ou
des anciens étudiants, à leur propre discrétion. La consultation n’est pas un concours de “combien-sont-pour vs.
combien-sont-contre”. Compte tenu de la nature et du rôle
du Quid, la consultation doit déterminer si le contenu spécifique est digne de publication. L’auteur peut être consulté à
de nombreuses reprises si les rédacteurs-en-chef jugent que
ceci est nécessaire.
4. Décision
Les rédacteurs-en-chef discuteront des résultats de leurs
consultations et rendront une décision de: a) accepter la
contribution comme telle; b) accepter la contribution avec
des modifications mineures portées par eux-mêmes; c) retourner la contribution à l’auteur pour modification avec des
suggestions portées à la discrétion des rédacteurs-en-chef; d)
rejeter la contribution sans offrir des suggestions. La décision
des rédacteurs-en-chef est finale et incontestable.
Les rédacteurs-en-chef, à leur discrétion, peuvent publier un
avis de refus dans le Quid avec les raisons du refus ainsi que
le nom de l’auteur. L’auteur peut également demander qu’un
tel avis apparaisse; dans un tel cas, l’avis portera le format
suivant: « AUTEUR --- ANNÉE --- TITRE a été soumis pour
publication mais ne sera pas imprimé, en accord avec les
politiques et principes d’opération du Quid ».
6) POLITIQUE DE PRÉAVIS ET D’AMENDEMENT
Les rédacteurs-en-chef publieront ces principes dans le premier
numéro du Quid à chaque semestre. Des amendements peuvent
être proposés uniquement par le personnel du Quid. Si un amendement est proposé, il sera indiqué dans le numéro subséquent
Les items qui sont potentiellement inadéquats pour la publi- du Quid afin d’offrir une opportunité d’au moins une semaine aux
cation incluent (sans s’y limiter): les contributions qui sont
étudiants de rédiger des contributions. Les amendements doivent
trop longues ou trop courtes; les contributions qui possèdent être approuvés par une majorité du personnel actif du Quid. Les
le potentiel de créer un environnement hostile pour les
rédacteurs-en-chef doivent publier un avis de tout changement
professeurs ou les étudiants; et les contributions à nature
ou de toute tentative de changement dans le Quid.
diffamatoire.
2. Discussion
À la deuxième étape de la révision, les rédacteurs-en-chef
et le rédacteur qui a accompli la révision initiale discutent
de leurs conclusions spécifiques vis-à-vis l’article. S’il existe
un consensus de contenu contestable parmi une majorité
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
18
Since the Quid belongs to all Law students, it is essential to adopt of the material or views contained therein. Given the nature of
a transparent editorial policy that will guarantee both freedom of the publication and its limited resources, the Quid will not underexpression and the protection of individual interests.
take to evaluate the factual accuracy of submissions. Submissions
are presumptively publishable unless they do not conform to the
You will find below some principles that we hope will guide you
guidelines contained herein.
when you write your articles. While they were developed after
consultation with students and members of the LSA executive,
2) SUBMISSION AND REVOCATION POLICY
they may not be perfect: we welcome your comments at quid.
The Quid is a submission-driven publication. The deadline for
law@mcgill.ca.
submission shall appear in every issue. Articles submitted must
include the author’s name and year of study. If the author is wriWherever possible, the Quid publishes everything submitted.
ting in a particular capacity (i.e. ‘LSA President’; ‘Head of Student
However, to encourage a climate where each student will feel
Club’) this is to be indicated by the author.
comfortable sharing his/her opinions, in rare circumstances,
articles may be edited, and in extreme cases refused, at the disNo material submitted after the deadline shall be published witcretion of the editors-in-chief.
hout the express consent of the Editors-in-Chief. Late submissions
will be slated for publication in the subsequent edition.
While all submissions are presumptively publishable, potentially
criminal speech (i.e. hate speech) and-or libelous speech are not Articles submitted for publication may be revoked by the author.
presumptively publishable. In such cases the author must make a The Quid will honour all such requests provided they are made
strong case that the information is accurate, that journalistic stan- at least two days prior to publication. The Quid will do its best to
dards and ethics were followed; discretion to publish such articles honour a late revocation request but will not stop the printing of
lies solely with the Editors-in-Chief.
an issue that has already gone to press.
QUID NOVI POLICIES AND OPERATING GUIDELINES
3) ANONYMOUS SUBMISSION POLICY
The Quid will publish anonymous articles provided they conform
The Quid belongs to students enrolled in the Faculty of Law at
to the Quid policy and operating guidelines. Anonymous articles
McGill University. It is essential that it maintains transparent
present a challenge for content review for they do not allow the
policies and guidelines that take into consideration values such
Editors-in-Chief to consult with the author. As such, if an anonyas the freedom of expression as well as interests such as those of mous article is rejected for publication, notification of rejection
students and faculty. The policies and operating guidelines are set must be published in the Quid.
forth below. Questions and comments may be directed to: quid.
law@mcgill.ca. This policy is updated at the sole discretion of the 4) EDITING GUIDELINES
Editors-in-Chiefs provided notice of update has been published in Every item submitted to the Quid shall be reviewed. The Quid
reserves the right to make grammatical edits to improve the
the Quid.
readability or suitability for publication of an article. Editors may
This version of the policy is enacted as of 2014.
also correct spelling mistakes. If a submission requires significant
editing - in the view of the first person reviewing the article - this
This document has seven sections:
shall be indicated to the Editors-in-Chief. The Editors may refuse
to publish the article for lack of suitability or may conduct signi1) General Guidelines
ficant edits and publish the submission. Minor edits need not be
communicated to the author prior to publication.
2) Submission and Revocation Policy
5) CONTENT REVIEW POLICY
3) Anonymous Submission Policy
All submissions made to the Quid shall be reviewed for content.
There is a four-step review process.
4) Editing Guidelines
1. Review by Editor
5) Content Review Policy
The Editor assigned to review the article (or an Editor-inChief) individually reviews the submission for content they
6) Overheards Review Policy
believe to be questionable. Questionable content is content
that, in the appreciation of that respective Editor, is either
7) Notice and Amendment Process
potentially offensive or potentially not suitable for publication. The following factors will be considered when assessing
1) GENERAL GUIDELINES
potential offensiveness: the overall tone of the submission,
Every item appearing in the Quid Novi is an opinion piece that
the specific word(s) used, the context in which they are used,
reflects only the views of the person (s) submitting the item. Neicoupled with an individual appreciation of the potential
ther the Quid Novi, the LSA, nor the Faculty of Law endorse any
reaction to said material by the student body, professors,
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
19
alumni, and the Montreal legal community. If, on balance,
6) OVERHEARDS REVIEW POLICY
any individual Editor or an Editor-in-Chief believes there is
questionable content, this is communicated to the Editors-in- Overheards at the faculty must be sent to quid.law@mcgill.cabeChief.
fore 5 PM each Thursday to be published in the following edition.
Items that are potentially not suitable for publication include,
but are not limited to: submissions that are too long or too
short; submissions that have the potential to create a hostile
environment for faculty or students; and submissions that
are defamatory in nature.
When an overheard mentions a professor, the Editors-in-Chief
shall verify before publication if the professor consents to its
publications as, to its publication with her name redacted, or
does not consent to its publication at all. The Editors-in-Chief
shall respect her decision.
2. Discussion
At the second stage of review, the Editors-in-Chief and Editor
who did the initial review discuss their specific findings with
one another in relation to the submission. If there is a finding
of questionable content that is agreed to by a majority (i.e.
at least two-out-of-three between the reviewing editor and
the Editors-in Chief), the article goes for consultation. If there
is no agreed finding of questionable content, the article is
published as is or with edits at the discretion of the Editorsin-Chief.
Overheards shall identify students only by their year of study (1L,
2L, 3L or 4L).
The Editors-in-Chief shall be responsible to compile in a single
document all the overheards received by the applicable deadline.
This document is thereafter to be treated as a regular submission,
and shall undergo the content review policy described in section
5, supra, the only difference being that overheards shall be sent
to all the editors on schedule for that week, not only one of them.
7) NOTICE AND AMENDMENT PROCESS
3. Consultation
At the Consultation stage, the Editors-in-Chief must advise
the author that there is a content concern. The Editors-inChief may consult others about the submission, provided
there is no information given identifying the author(s). The
Editors-in-Chief may consult with any individuals mentioned in the article, fellow students, faculty members, and/or
alumni, at the discretion of the Editors-in-Chief. Consultation
is not a question of how-many-for vs. how-many-against;
rather, given the nature and role of the Quid, consultation
is premised on whether the specific content is suitable for
publication. The author may be consulted numerous times if
the Editors-in-Chief feel this is necessary.
4. Decision
The Editors-in-Chief will discuss the results of their consultations and will render a decision to: [a] accept the submission
as is; [b] accept the submission with minor edit(s) to be
completed by the Editors-in-Chief; [c] accept the submission
with or without minor edit(s) and publish a warning along
the submission; [d] return the submission to the author for
modification with suggestions provided at the discretion of
the Editors-in-Chief, or, alternatively, [e] reject publication
without modification suggestions. The decision of the Editors-in-Chief is final and binding. The Editors-in-Chief, at their
discretion, may publish a notice of rejection in the Quid with
their reasons, indicating, at their discretion, the name(s) of
the author(s). Alternatively, the author(s) may request that
such a notice appear, in which case the notice will bear the
format: AUTHOR -- YEAR -- TITLE OF SUBMISSION was submitted for publication but will not be printed in accordance
with the Quid Policy and Operational Guidelines.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
20
The Editors-in-Chief shall publish these guidelines in the Quid in
the first issue of every semester. Changes may only be proposed
by Quid staff. If there is a proposed change, it will be indicated
in the next issue of the Quid with the opportunity for students
to make submissions for a period of at least one week. Changes
must be approved by a majority of active Quid staff. The Editorsin-Chief must publish notice of any change or change attempt in
the Quid.
In-House Diva
CHARLIE
FELdman
OVERHEARDS
THE QUID IS BACK AND SO ARE THE OVERHEADS!
Prof. Smith I don’t think judges should listen to us (law professors)
very much. They tend to get it wrong when they do.
Howdy y’all! Most of these are from the end of last semester and
only going to press now… but if you have anything else, envoyez it In Tax Policy...
svp! quid.charlie@gmail.com!
Student: But by that logic then we should just share our sex lives
with the CRA.
Prof. Christians: You’re having too much enjoyment so we tax it?
Prof. (Redacted): Did you hear about that new Facebook feature Prof. Weinstock: Or you’re not getting enough so the state gives
that allows you to share prescription medicines you got under
you a benefit.
your healthcare plan? Like, NOBODY would want that. Hey
Prof. Christians: I guess it works both ways…
everyone, I brought hemorrhoid cream…. and *looks around*
(student name) brought that gonorrhea medication. You know?
Prof. Fox-Decent: I didn’t want to go into law - I thought it was a
Who wants to share that?!
sausage-grinding machine for predatory capitalists… some would
say it still is.
Prof. Campbell: I know. You’re excited to be here. It’s January. It’s
-200 outside.
1L: The thing about hockey boards is that you couldn’t use them
for skydiving.
Prof. Christians: No, the pioneers in Little House on the Prairie
were NOT making sugar out of beets!
1L: What is confidence if not just not giving a shit?
Prof. Smith: Half the money goes to lawyers - dead weight with
no productive value!
2L to Prof: Can you please repeat that? I was distracted by the …
moaning.
Prof. Campbell: I don’t usually like what I read. That’s not true, I
read a lot of good books over the holidays. But now we’re back in
the academic context…
Prof. Anker: So, suppose I want to get people to move to Quebec.
I create all these wonderful social benefits - and then I dismantle
them!
Prof. Campbell: I love when students come to me three days
before something big is due and say «Don’t worry - I have it all
done. I mean, I haven’t written anything but I’ve thought it all
out...»
Prof. Christians: It’s so great Bill Gates cares about malaria
because if he cared about massive giant mushroom-shaped sculptures then we’d have giant mushroom shaped sculptures in every
park in America!
Prof. Smith: Think of the things you should value in your lives.
Love, friendship, art, maybe religion, family…
1L: Sleep?
Prof. Smith: … no.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
21
MCGILL LAW MEMES
Law I
ANDRÉ
CAPRETTI
Law I
Benjamin
Dionne
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
22
In-House Diva
CHARLIE
FELDMAN
HIVER WORD SEARCH
[Continued from page 3]
1. Kozlowska, Hanna. «Identity Politics Play out on Social Media after Paris Attacks with #JeSuisAhmed and #JeSuisJuif.» Quartz. Accessed
January 11, 2015. http://qz.com/324273/identity-politics-play-out-on-social-media-after-paris-attacks-with-jesuisahmed-and-jesuisjuif/.
2. Mullin, Gemma. «Revealed: How Hero Muslim Shop Assistant Hid Customers in Freezer of Jewish Deli after Islamic Gunman Raided
Supermarket.» Mail Online. January 11, 2015. Accessed January 11, 2015. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2903829/Saved-hidingFREEZER-Thirty-Jewish-shoppers-avoided-taken-hostage-kosher-deli-shutting-cold-storage-huddling-stay-warm.html.
3.Pfeffer, Anshel. «Charlie Hebdo, Jewish Grocery Attacks Herald a Bleak New Era for France - World.» Haaretz.com. January 9, 2015.
Accessed January 11, 2015. http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/.premium-1.636248.
4. Mulholland, Rory. «Paris Shootings: The Backlash Begins against French Muslims.» The Telegraph. January 10, 2015. Accessed January 11,
2015. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11337938/Paris-shootings-The-backlash-begins-against-French-Muslims.html.
5. Cole, Juan. «Paris Terrorist Was Radicalized by Bush’s Iraq War, Abu Ghraib Torture.» Informed Comment. January 8, 2015. Accessed
January 11, 2015. http://www.juancole.com/2015/01/terrorist-radicalized-torture.html.
6. LeVine, Mark. «Why Charlie Hebdo Attack Is Not about Islam.» Al Jazeera - Opinion. January 10, 2015. Accessed January 11, 2015. http://
www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/01/charlie-hebdo-islam-cartoon-terr-20151106726681265.html.
7. One trillion is a thousand times one billion.
8. Sirota, David. «$14 Million An Hour: War Costs Top $1.6 Trillion Since 9/11, Say Congressional Researchers.» International Business Times.
December 22, 2014. Accessed January 11, 2015. http://www.ibtimes.com/14-million-hour-war-costs-top-16-trillion-911-say-congressionalresearchers-1764816.
9. «Human Costs of War: Direct War Death in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan October 2001- April 2014.» Costs of War. Accessed January
11, 2015. http://www.costsofwar.org/sites/default/files/Direct War Death Toll in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan since 2001 to April 2014 6
26.pdf. Civilian statistic calculated by taking the averages of total civilian and all deaths.
10. Connolly, Matt. «The Military Has Wasted Enough Money on This Jet to Buy Every Homeless American a Mansion.» Mic. July 10, 2014.
Accessed January 11, 2015. http://mic.com/articles/93327/the-military-has-wasted-enough-money-on-this-jet-to-buy-every-homeless-american-a-mansion.
11. Mulholland, Angela. «Veterans Still Angry over Pensions, Budget Cuts.» CTVNews. November 5, 2011. Accessed January 11, 2015. http://
www.ctvnews.ca/veterans-still-angry-over-pensions-budget-cuts-1.723266.
12. Allentuck, Andrew. «B.C. Couple Worries That Unexpected Pay Cuts Could Severely Jeopardize Their Retirement Plans.» Financial Post.
January 9, 2015. Accessed January 11, 2015. http://business.financialpost.com/2015/01/09/b-c-couple-worries-that-unexpected-pay-cutscould-severely-jeopardize-their-retirement-plans/.
13. Dwight D. Eisenhower: «Address «The Chance for Peace» Delivered Before the American Society of Newspaper Editors.,» April 16, 1953.
Accessed January 11, 2015. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.
edu/ws/?pid=9819.
QN •
13 JAN 2015 •
23
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