International Law Conference Tackles Tough Contemporary Issues

By Daisy McCabe-Lokos of Windsor Law.

The Canadian Council on International Law held their 37th annual conference last weekend in Ottawa.  The conference ran three days and showcased a range of panels discussing a variety of issues.

I was surprised to see that a significant portion of the attendees were students from law schools across Canada.  This being my first chance to attend I am unsure whether this student turnout was unprecedented, however it seemed to indicate to me the increasing relevance of international legal issues in young law students’ educational experiences.

The conference not only gave us a chance to get a sense of the professional opportunities that exist in the international sphere, but it also gave us a snapshot of the developing fields of contemporary international law.

The panel that I found most enlightening was entitled “Law Applicable to Overseas Government Operations”.

It was chaired by John Currie – Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, and attended by Paul Champ – Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne and Yazbeck LLP; Oonagh Fitzgerald – Senior General Counsel, Department of National Defense/Canadian Forces Legal Advisor; Joanna Harrington – Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Alberta; Major General Lewis Mackenzie (retired); and Christopher Waters – Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Windsor.

The panel discussed the applicability of law – national and international – to international government operations.  Much of the focus was on the debatable “hierarchy” of law present during overseas military operations.

The panel touched on questions such as – do and should Canadian Charter values and obligations follow our armed forces on international operations?  Should the Canadian military be more susceptible to civilian oversight?

Professor Waters explored the courts’ deference to the military regarding issues of possible misconduct.  He discussed the reluctance of Canadian, American and British courts to rule on the actions of their militaries that might be seen as conflicting with Charter values or other obligations to respect international human rights.

Paul Champ gave us a practical example how some of these issues play out by discussing the Afghan detainee case.  This case deals with individual’s allegations of torture after being transferred (in Afghanistan) from the custody of Canadian military officials to the custody of Afghan military officials – where the alleged torture occurred.  The complications of legal jurisdiction and civilian oversight of military operations are evident under these circumstances.

Major General Lewis Mackenzie provided a completely refreshing albeit troubling perspective.

Having been involved in numerous peace keeping and military operations with the Canadian Military, General Mackenzie was able to enlighten us civilians on exactly how the international legal initiatives sometimes pan out on the ground.

He clearly articulated his frustration with the sometimes impractical and unreadable legal mandates provided by the United Nations during peacekeeping operations.  He expressed his concern about the bureaucratic and sluggish nature of legal process and its negative impact on the progress of UN missions and the ultimate safety of non-combatant civilians.

Overall the panel was balanced and informative.  There were contrasting viewpoints and a variation of experience among speakers.  Many of the other panels held by the CCIL were similarly enjoyable and did not disappoint.