RSS FeedDr. Sarita Verma at the Health Law Conference
First post in a series on the First Annual Interprofessional Health Law Conference.
Dr. Sarita Verma, Deputy Dean of Graduate Postgraduate education at UofT Medicine, is a family physician who originally trained as a lawyer at UofO.
She quickly polled the audience and found about half of the attendees were law students, half medical students, with some nursing, public health, and other graduate students.
The Tension Pentagon
Dr. Verma briefly discussed some of the many areas of health law where medicine and law interact. She noted that mental health was one of the growing areas of health law.
She then presented a new model she had developed to evaluate the context of health law issues. This tension pentagon was comprised of 5 different stakeholders, whose interests often conflicted and interacted with each other.
At the center of the pentagon was the public, which is important in creating a publicly-centered health system.
The 5 influencers were:
- ethics
- practitioners
- funders
- industry
- legal system
First Annual Interprofessional Health Law Conference
The First Annual Interprofessional Health Law Conference is being held this morning at UofT law. The session is being broadcasted live to viewers across the world.
Notes from the session can be found below.
-
Dr. Sarita Verma at the Health Law Conference
-
The Values and Ethics of Euthanasia
-
The Harm Reduction Controversy & Injection Sites
-
Law 101 for Health Care Professionals
The Fight for Iraq War Resisters to Remain in Canada is a Two-Front War
The following article was sent to us by the author, Krystalline Kraus, for republication. Originally posted here.
The political front
On June 3, 2008, Canadian Parliament voted in favour of allowing Iraq war resisters to seek permanent residence status in Canada.
This non-binding motion called for the creation of a special government program to, “allow conscientious objectors and their families … who have refused or left military service related to a war not sanctioned by the United Nations to apply for permanent resident status.”
One hundred and thirty-seven MPs from the Liberal party, the NDP and the Bloc Québécois voted in favour of the motion, while 110 Conservative MPs voted against.
While the motion was passed by a majority in Parliament, the minority Conservative government under Stephen Harper has yet to enact it; this despite constant lobbying
from the War Resister Support Campaign (WRSC), immigration rights groups and anti-war activists.
The judicial front
Even though Canadian Parliament had passed the June 3, 2008, it is non-binding. Therefore the Canadian immigration system, through the Immigrant and Refugee Board
(IRB), has been issuing deportation orders to those resisters who have applied for refugee status.
These deportation orders are being contested in the Canadian judicial system as the Federal Court considers a series of IRB decisions and defendant appeals.
Canada’s immigration process includes both an Humanitarian and Compassionate (H + C) application and a Pre-Risk Removal Assessment (PRRA), to determine the impact of a deportation on the individual or if they would face undue hardship if returned to their home country.
Legal challenges
There are a number of different resisters challenging their negative H + C and PRRA decisions, requesting an appeal or a new refugee application from the IRB.
One such case includes a Federal court judge’s acceptance to review the deportation order of resister Jeremy Hinzman. This allows Hinzman and his wife and children to remain in Canada until the appeal of their negative PRRA is heard.
Despite an IRB ruling stating that Hinzman would face no undue hardship if returned to the United States to face a military trial for desertion, the Justice Mosley of the Federal Court ruled that, “[b]ased on the evidence and submissions before me, I am satisfied that the applicants would suffer irreparable harm if a stay were not granted pending determination of their leave application.”
Lawyers for the resisters and the WRSC both assert that any soldier deported back to the US to stand trial would face undue hardship. They cite an emerging trend of prosecution in U.S. court marshal proceedings that considers speaking out publicly against the U.S. government and the Iraq war grounds for increased punishment.
This risk of harsher punishment – including prosecution with charges equal to a civilian felony conviction, prison sentences, denial of veteran benefits for themselves and their family and the military humiliation of receiving a dishonourable discharge – is at the heart of Hinzman’s immigration case currently before the courts.
War refugees
In recent days, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Jason Kenney (replacing Diane Finley) has been catching heat for public statements made to the Toronto Sun concerning US war resisters, spoken from his position as the minister directly in charge of immigration.
Commenting after resister Kimberly Rivera received a negative IRB decision on January 7, 2009, he referred to Iraq war resisters as, “bogus refugee claimants” in a later interview on Parliament Hill.
He went on to state, “I don’t appreciate people adding to the backlog and clogging up the system whose claims are being rejected consistently 100 per cent of the time.”
Minister Kenney also responded to an article written by John Hogan in the Toronto Sun where Hogan questioned the independence of the IRB in light of the Conservative governments consistent negative stance towards US war resisters. In a response to this article, he wrote that, “war resistance is futile” and re-affirmed the IRB’S independence.
Critics of the minority Conservative government claim that Minister Kenney’s comments prejudice any immigration hearings for war resisters.
Lee Zaslofsky, an organizer with the War Resister Support Campaign (WRCS), criticized Minister Kenney’s comments as political interference on the supposedly independent IRB tribunal.
“Everyone, including war resisters, has the right to expect their applications will be dealt with in a fair and impartial manner,” he wrote in a statement.
“Minister Kenney’s comments show the Harper government has a blanket policy of opposition against war resisters, which makes it nearly impossible for them to be treated on a ‘case-by-case basis’ as our government has been leading Canadians to believe.”
Criticism of Minister Kenney’s remarks were also laid down through an open letter by Elizabeth McWeeney, President of the Canadian Council of Refugees.
In the letter writ on January 8, 2009, she stated her concern surrounding Minister Kenney’s comments which she called, “highly inappropriate” since they “give the strong appearance of political interference.”
She was referring to the fact that the IRB re-appointments are made by Cabinet and IRB members might fear for their tenure if they do not toe a certain political line.
She wrote, “highly publicized cases such as the war resisters are always challenging for the IRB which must live up to its obligations to make fair, impartial and politically unmotivated determinations, based on jurisprudence and the evidence before it.”
Any political assertions otherwise, especially spoken from the minister responsible for immigration affairs, threatens the independence of the IRB and the right of war resisters to a fair immigration assessment.
McWeeny also refuted the Minister’s assumptions around the burden that war resisters supposedly place on the Canadian immigration system.
She was “shocked” that Minister Kenney would attribute the systematic delays in the refugee claim process to the war resisters, slamming the Minister for the lack of credibility to his argument since the number of war resister claims was “miniscule”.
Instead, she cited that the backlog was in fact a consequence of the Conservative government to appoint IRB members.
This slams shut the door on any Conservative government intentions to utilize a divide and conquer strategy between refugees.
The open letter ends with the Canadian Council of Refugees affirming its support for Iraq war resisters, “these are individuals who deserve our admiration for following their consciences and refusing to participate in wrongdoing, at significant cost to themselves.”
Critical juncture
This is a critical juncture for Iraq war resisters in Canada – with a series of deportation orders scheduled to start at the end of the month.
We as a society must weight their struggle using both our hands. Carefully determine the possible outcomes to their fight to remain in Canada. Carefully determine the value of life and the cost of protecting it.
Jail time in a U.S. prison for refusing to kill or a new home in Canada for refusing to kill.
The cost of laying down one’s guns and refusing to fight is soon to be determined legally in our courts and morally in the hearts of Canadians across the country.
The price: freedom or deportation.
Law Students Demand Repatriation of Omar Khadr
Hundreds of law students from across the country have added their names to the growing list of people calling for the repatriation and fair trial of Omar Khadr, as well as the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility where he is currently held.
Canadian law students created the Omar Khadr Project last fall, pursuing the goal of repatriation and fair treatment for Omar Khadr. The organization is composed of law students and young lawyers from across the country who believe that respect for human rights is a fundamental Canadian value.
In May 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously found that the conditions under which Omar Khadr was being detained “constituted a clear violation of fundamental human rights protected by international law” (Canada (Justice) v. Khadr, 2008 SCC 28, at para 24.)
The Court found that Canada’s participation in Khadr’s case breached our own obligations under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Geneva Conventions.
Below is a press release (abridged) sent to us by the Omar Khadr Project discussing the strategies that the group has been pursuing.
Canadian Law Students Take Actions Calling on Harper, Obama to Ensure Repatriation of Omar Khadr, Closure of Guantanamo Bay
This week, the Omar Khadr Project launches a series of actions calling on Prime Minister Stephen Harper and President-elect Barack Obama to ensure Khadr’s repatriation as a key step in the closure of the illegal Guantanamo Bay detention centre.
It is expected that one of President-elect Obama’s first executive actions will be to begin shutting down Guantanamo Bay. But, “the looming questions for Omar Khadr,” explains Project member Kate Oja, “are whether the new President will act in time to stop Omar’s deeply flawed ‘trial’, and whether Prime Minister Harper will agree to bring Omar back to Canada.”
This week, the Omar Khadr Project joins with groups across Canada, the U.S. and beyond to put pressure on both Canadian and American governments to act quickly in the spirit of justice. We are launching 4 actions:
- Hundreds of law and articling students signed a petition calling on the Canadian government to repatriate Omar Khadr and protect his human rights. The petition will be officially presented to Parliament once it resumes.
- A letter was written to President-elect Obama to draw his attention to the urgency and injustice of Khadr’s case.
- As a Christmas present, and in honour of the 60th anniversary of the UN Declaration on Human Rights, the Omar Khadr Project sent Prime Minister Harper, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Justice copies of a children’s picture book on basic human rights, emphasizing sections on fair trial rights and the rights of the child.
- On Saturday 17 January 2009, a rally is being held outside the U.S. Consulate in Toronto, along with Amnesty International, the Coalition to Repatriate Omar Khadr, and other
supporters.
Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen detained at age 15, remains the only national of a Western country to be held at Guantanamo. His trial before the internationally-condemned military commission system is scheduled to begin on January 26th, just 6 days after Obama’s inauguration.
Note: Law students interested in assisting Khadr’s legal defence team can contact us for more information.
Strange B&E May Signal Growing Practice Area
Police are chasing a man in Cairns, Australia for breaking and entering into a store and stealing their toys. He’s suspected of several break-ins at a s similar store in the city.
But these stores aren’t for kids. They are adult sex shops, and the product he has been stealing are inflatable dolls. After using the toys from the store the suspect disposed of them in the alley.
The owner of the store, who declined to provide his full name, said,
He has been taking the dolls out the back and blowing them up and using the dolls and leaving them in the alley. It is totally bizarre. It is a real concern that someone like that is out on the street.
Police do have several clues they are following that distinguishes the suspect:
- He seems to have a crush on a particular model, “Jungle Jane”
- His preferred method of entry is to squeeze through tight holes
- Despite always cleaning up after himself, the suspect has left unspecified samples of DNA on the dolls
As strange as the story may sound, there is a vinyl lining in it for lawyers worried about how the economy is going to affect their work prospects.
Robert J. Ambrogi claims the adult entertainment industry continues to make a buck even in the worst of times.
He notes a recent conference, in Las Vegas of course, that included a panel on adult entertainment law, which overlaps with areas of obscenity and free speech, zoning, labor law and record-keeping.
Even more interesting was that the media reported there were more lawyers in the audience than on the stage.
According to Ambrogi,
Lawyers, it appears, can make a decent living from indecency, even in a recession.
Updates
They caught him.
YouTube Video Entered as Evidence in B.C. Trial
The B.C. Supreme Court entered a YouTube video of a Victoria man yesterday, the first time the Crown has done so in that province.
“AR-15 Makes Swiss Cheese Out of a Couch,” now removed from the site, was used as evidence against Brian Lynn Morrison for a number of charges, including the use of a prohibited weapon in a careless manner and without a licence or registration certificate.
The video allegedly shows Morrison demonstrating the weapon and explaining the silencer, saying,
It’s so powerful it goes right through everything.
Interview with the Author of “Life Without Lawyers”
Law schools on both sides of the border are graduating more lawyers than ever before. What effect will the influx of lawyers have on the profession and on the litigation culture in the United States and Canada? Has litigation become America’s national sport? Has frivolous litigation reached crisis levels?
I spoke with Philip K. Howard, best-selling author of the new book, Life Without Lawyers: Liberating America from Too Much Law, to find answers to these questions, and to find out what can be done to bring common sense back into the courtroom.
Howard is himself a lawyer and legal reform activist; he is the founder and chair of Common Good, a “nonprofit, nonpartisan legal reform coalition dedicated to restoring common sense to America.” He also contributes to the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.
Obama: End of Guantanamo and Good News for Omar Khadr
I have previously expressed my shame at the Canadian Government’s failure to follow the example of every other Western nation in demanding the repatriation of our citizen at Guantanamo Bay.
The advocacy in favour of Omar Khadr’s return to Canada has come from many circles. The calls have come from Sen. Romeo Dallaire, UNICEF, Amnesty International, and the Canadian Bar Association, among many others. Most consider Khadr to be a child soldier, and consider his detention and the military tribunal process to be a violation of the rule of law.
This choir of voices has finally reached a crescendo. I have good news to report.
President-elect Barack Obama has signalled his intention to close Guantanamo Bay forever – and he intends to do it soon.
In an interview with ABC’s “This Week,” Obama said:
I don’t want to be ambiguous about this. We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our Constitution.”
Reuters is reporting that Obama intends to close the prison perhaps within his first week after taking office:
“There is going to be an executive order on closing down Guantanamo,” the adviser told Reuters, adding the move would probably be made during Obama’s first several days in office.
What this means for Omar Khadr remains unclear. It will no doubt take time before the prison can be closed and its inmates transferred to face trial elsewhere. Most likely, this will mean an end to the military tribunals, which were denounced by the U.S. Supreme Court, in favour of domestic trials in U.S. Federal Court.
Stephen Harper, meanwhile, remains staunchly committed to leaving Khadr to be dealt with by the Americans, whether or not their process violates the rule of law. This is in spite of serious concerns raised by his own government lawyers. Harper is unsure of whether Obama’s announcement will substantively affect Khadr, but he remains defferential:
“The promise that president-elect Obama made was that he would close down the facilities at Guantanamo. That’s primarily, as I understand it, because of the objection to the fact that many of the people at that facility aren’t charged with anything,” he told reporters in Vancouver.
“I don’t think you can necessarily leap to the conclusion that it will affect people who have in fact been charged, and who are facing a legal process.”
One thing is clear: Omar Khadr’s languishing in that deplorable offshore prison will soon be at an end.
A New MOFO for a New Year
Middle Passage Law Series
Hahahahahahah…. I know what you are thinking, but no, not the expletive. “MOFO” is in fact short for the law firm of Morrison & Foerster.
I was wondering how best to kick off the New Year with the Middle Passage Law series and I thought it best to start with positive news.
A new MOFO for a New Year refers to Trevor James, a UK tax partner in Morrison & Foerster, who has been elevated to managing partner in the firm’s London office. And, oh yeah, Mr. James just happens to be black.
This is a first for an international law firm.
Please do not misread this post. It isn’t that UK law firms are light years ahead of their Canadian counterparts in terms of black diversity — for they are not, as the UK based Black Solicitors Network’s 2008 diversity league table makes clear. However, UK law firms and the legal establishment are ahead of their Canadian counterparts in two significant ways worthy of note.
The first of these is Mr. James’ appointment — earned on merit.
What is the probability of such an appointment at a Canadian national or international law firm in the near or medium term?
To be honest I just don’t see it happening, but I could be wrong — in fact I want to be wrong.
The second area to note is the fact that such a thing as a diversity league table exists.
It is not that Canadian law firms or the larger legal establishment does not measure diversity — for they do. However, on closer examination it will be observed that these measurements are largely confined to gender. Don’t get me wrong, this is a good thing and should be lauded; however, I believe that such measures should be expanded to other diversity communities.
Why the comfort with measuring gender and the fear — yes, I said fear, because that is the only way I can characterize it — with measuring race?
I really cannot answer this questions as it is far beyond my current knowledge and skills — I want to answer it and maybe one day I will.
I didn’t mean to harp on the negative but I just wanted to make you aware, that is if you were not already, of all too real an issue.
So back to the positive.
I wish Mr. James – A New MOFO For A New Year – all the best and I hope that his current and future successes will serve as a shining example of what is possible.
The Conflicted Relationship between Lawyers and “Indians”
[The following piece was sent to us by a reader. Reproduced with permission of the author.]
An Identification of the Conflicted Relationship between the Indigenous Nations and the Legal Profession in North America
by Bruce Clark, LL.B., M.A., Ph.D.
An Indian goes into a law office and says, “Since my traditional government never agreed by any treaty to be governed by your government, why does your legal system apply your government’s laws to me on my indigenous nation’s unceded national territory?”
If he lives in Canada the Indian is likely to be aware of the fact that the original constitution for all of British North America (the Royal Proclamation of 1763) reiterated the stipulation that the first principle of all land occupancy and jurisdiction law is, “that the several Nations or Tribes of Indians with whom We are connected and who live under our Protection should not be molested or disturbed in the Possession of such Parts of Our Dominions and Territories as not having been ceded to or purchased by Us are reserved to them or any of them as their Hunting Grounds.”
Canadian / US Law Outline Wiki
A new Wikipedia-type site for law outlines has been created by law students at Queen’s University.
Law students across Canada and the USA can post to the wiki, which works just like Wikipedia; anybody can post, and anybody can edit.
The hope is that it will be used to help students collaborate and share ideas.
There are already a few outlines on the site. The tricky part is formatting them so they look good in wikipedia language.
Students are encouraged to convert their outlines to text using a .doc to .txt converter and post them on the site for others to edit. Anybody can then fix up the formatting and correct any mistakes.
Articles should be named using the following method: “School-Course” or “School-Course-Professor”.
For example, an outline for Queen’s University’s Commercial Law outline is named “Queen’s Commercial Law”. Students can also create outlines that are not specific to a school or a professor by simply naming the article by its course name.
Most law schools have a database of outlines, but nobody checks them for accuracy, and they’re usually out-dated. Now everybody will be able to help keep them up to date, and anybody with a computer will able to access the information for free.
Your Paralegal Has a Better Job than You Do
Sounds strange, but it’s true, according a new comprehensive ranking of jobs by JobsRated.com.
Five different criteria were used in the rankings:
- Stress
- Work Environment
- Physical Demands
- Income
- Outlook
Although lawyers made more money than paralegals, other job factors brought lawyers way down on the list.
Debra Cassens Weiss of the ABA Journal explains,
Lawyers and stockbrokers, ranked 84th, both did poorly, and the reason is stress, the editors say. “Attorneys and stockbrokers may earn considerably more than bookbinders or telephone repair technicians [ranked 83rd and 81st respectively], but these high-powered careers are hurt by anxiety, as both rank among the 20 most stressful jobs on our list.”
So once you’ve finally paid off your law school debts, you might want to start searching for a new job – as a paralegal.
