QUID NOVI Journal des étudiant-e-s en droit de l’université McGill Published by the McGill Law Students’ Association Volume 36, no 13 3 février 2015 | February 3, 2015 Édition spéciale - Special Issue CURRICULUM RENEWAL 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 Journal des étudiant-e-s en droit de l’université McGill McGill Law’s Weekly Student Newspaper Volume 36, no 13 3 février 2015 | February 3, 2015 What’s inside ? Quel est le contenu ? ÉDITO3 CURRICULAR RENEWAL OF THE BCL/LLB PROGRAM 4 LES ATTENTES ET LE BIEN-ÊTRE 5 ON ARCHITECTURE - THOUGHTS ON CURRICULUM REFORM 6 BLSAM, RADLAW AND WOCC JOINT STATEMENT 8 CURRICULUM RENEWAL: A RESPONSE 13 SAO CORNER 16 RÉFLEXIONS SUR LA RÉFORME DU CURRICULUM 18 EXPERIENTAL (NOT EXPLOITATIVE) EDUCATION 21 THINKING ABOUT EQUITY AND INCLUSION 25 LIBRARY NEWS 26 ASSOCIATE REVIEWERS Pouneh Davar-Ardakani Kaishan He Lindsay Little Elspeth McMurray Samantha Rudolph David Searle Andrew Stuart STAFF WRITERS Linda Agaby Allison Render Samantha Rudolph Suzanne Zaccour Want to talk ? Tu veux t’exprimer ? Envoyez vos commentaires ou articles avant jeudi 17h à l’adresse : 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 melissa cederqvist The words and worlds we’RE TAUGHT After the Quid was chosen as the platform of communication about curriculum reform, the team had the pleasure this week of opening up our mailbox to a deluge of comments. Now, normally we’re happy because the Faculty is the natural habitat of many interesting people with interesting ideas who like to write and rant within our pages. This Edition was somewhat special, however, because the topic includes everyone in a common discussion. This discussion concerned what we’re taught and how we’re taught it. In a heavier word taken straight from the depths of various high school memories, “curriculum”. Curriculum reform means deciding what will be included in the study of law, and then passed along to generations of law students. It is important because inclusion of certain perspectives amounts to the omission of others. Furthermore, because nothing is value-neutral, the composition of chosen perspectives will always be ideological. All of this makes what would otherwise be an administrative question take on a larger significance. We need to be on the lookout for some assumptions. The idea that students are just passive receptacles for the content of their courses should be rejected. Learning is always a dynamic process, though the degree of dynamism varies. We all weigh what we’re taught with what we know, and weigh what seems true in theory with what has always proven true in reality. This is precisely where differences in lived experience produce different critiques of the law. Conversely it must be recognized that as law students our primary points of contact with the law are our professors, each other, and the course material. The information that gets included by those sources determines much of how we view the law and how we see our future role as legal actors. When studying codes, precedents and legal rules, there is immense significance in the subversive. The questioning of assumptions—like what is the moral difference between individual murders and large-scale state-sanctioned homicide—like would you defend the property rights of a billionaire against the needs of a thousand starving people—leads us to see the bigger picture rather than being consumed in a myopic obsession with process. ghout history. In science fiction, for instance, alternate visions of the future can serve to reconcile contemporary pessimism with humanist idealism. In the same way, sharing stories of how law actually affects people can peel away assumptions about its real function and effects. This is what makes troubling the tendency to present critical legal theory, critical race theory, and feminist theory as somehow supplementary rather than as necessary tools for understanding law. Side-lining these perspectives sets up the “basic” legal ideas and concepts as value-neutral. But what is more important for a law student than understanding the enormous gap between formal equality and substantive equality? The perspectives in the following pages raise even more questions which will hopefully provoke some response among students. That the Faculty of Law is “reaching out to the current cohort of law students” means an opening for students to think critically about course content. A few reflections on this particular week’s edition being chosen as the platform for consultation: the Quid team realizes that many students did not have the time to thoroughly read, process and write a response between the release date of the report in mid-January and last week’s submission deadline. The missing voices of these students are important and are definitely welcome in upcoming editions, but hopefully they are still considered in the process as well. Also, is the Quid is enough? Additional forums would allow greater representation of student perspectives. Finally, the way in which these perspectives actually get integrated into the final reforms should be clarified so students understand how to track their input and see how it is included in the end product. If students are to take the time to form and express their positions, they need to know how these will be influential. Hopefully all of this means that the fifteen-page report sits somewhere between your highlighted codal articles and your stained coffee mug, read three times over, and annotated. It hopefully also shows that students have a right to voice their opinion in what they are taught. Missed submitting last week? Do not dispair! Your student weekly remains open-doors for your reflections. With that in mind, enjoy! Disrupting ideological narratives with alternate perspectives, truths and facts, has been the role of certain genres of art throu- QN • 3 FEB 2015 • 3 Professor CURRICULAR RENEWAL OF THE BCL/LLB PROGRAM hoi kong The Faculty of Law has long been committed to innovation in legal education with an emphasis on civic engagement, critical reasoning, and the crossing of jurisdictional, disciplinary, linguistic, and cultural boundaries. While a diversity of voices and opinions were heard at the January 27 consultation, many perspectives were missing. In an effort to design an interactive roundtable consultation, attendance was limited to 40 participants. Working with this number, attempts were made to include both student and non-student L’exemplaire programme transystémique de McGill a été introduit stakeholders representing a variety of interests, constituencies, en 1999. Au cours des 15 dernières années, il a évolué dans plu- and perspectives. However, the consultation was only part of sieurs directions face à des changements dans l’environnement what the Faculty hopes will be an ongoing conversation among de l’éducation juridique. In light of these developments, Faculty the members of our community over the coming weeks. Council passed resolutions in April 2014 in support of curricular renewal of the BCL/LLB program. This special issue of the Quid Novi on curricular renewal is meant to provide an additional and valuable space for students to share Stakeholders in the future of the McGill program have an essen- their reflections within the Faculty. Just as the ideas raised at the tial role to play in the curricular renewal process. Students in par- January 27 consultation will be communicated to the Curriculum ticular have important experiences to share and vital suggestions Committee, so too will the contributions to this special issue will for the improvement of the program. Recognizing the need to be carefully considered and inform the decision-making process create spaces for different stakeholders to express their ideas and of the Committee. This is a unique moment in the Faculty’s hisconcerns about reforms to the BCL/LLB program, a consultation tory and we hope you will to contribute to the ongoing dialogue event was held in Thomson House on January 27, 2015. Plusieurs about the future of the McGill BCL/LLB. participants ont répondu à l’invitation, dont certains anciens étudiants ainsi que des étudiants actuels, des membres de la comProfessor Sébastien Jodoin Pilon, Sarah Chênevert-Beaudoin munauté académique et administrative de McGill, des juristes du (BCL/LLB candidate), and Sarah Berger Richardson (DCL candisecteur public et privé, ainsi que des membres du judiciaire. Une date) should be congratulated and thanked for their exemplary série de discussions a permis aux participants d’aborder difféwork on the public consultation. rents thèmes issus du rapport Renewing the McGill Curriculum: Pluralism in the World, dont 1) l’apprentissage expérientiel, 2) la résolution de problèmes, 3) le travail de synthèse, et 4) l’éthique Professor Hoi Kong, Associate Dean (Academic) dans l’éducation juridique. QN • 3 FEV 2015 •4 Law I FARNELL MORISSET LES ATTENTES ET LE BIEN-ÊTRE : QUELQUES RÉACTIONS À LA RÉFORME DU CURRICULUM Il y a six mois je ne savais pas ce qu’était un tort. Ça vaut la peine Crédits sans évaluation de garder ça en tête en lisant ce qui suit. Mais quand même, j’ai lu avec grand intérêt Renewing the McGill Curriculum: Pluralism Un des changements proposés est le retrait du cours de Introin the World et à l’invitation des professeurs Jodoin et Kong, je duction to Legal Research (mieux connu comme Legal Meth) et partage mon avis. l’introduction, à sa place, d’un cours de Problem Solving couplé d’une session intensive d’une semaine au début de chaque sesD’abord, sur le fond, je suis largement d’accord et même excité sion. En première session, cette semaine d’intégration vaudrait par la direction proposée. Elle parle, sans ironie ni cynisme, un crédit, mais n’aurait aucune évaluation associée. Essentield’une « dévotion à la poursuite de la sagesse » qui voit l’éducalement, c’est un crédit « garanti », dès la première semaine de tion juridique comme une fin morale en soi. C’est une excellente cours d’un nouvel arrivé, moyennant la simple présence des étuvision. Sur le fond, l’ajout du droit autochtone à l’approche trans- diants. En principe, j’ai l’impression qu’un crédit assuré ne vaut systémique, l’accent sur l’apprentissage expérientiel, et l’encadre- pas grand-chose – il ne démontre aucune compétence réelle et ment des premières semaines de chaque session me semblent ne démarque personne. Si ce n’est que pour ça, je suis incertain tous être d’excellentes idées. J’espère donc que les quelques devant le concept. En plus, l’offrir si tôt dans le cheminement commentaires suivants ne seront pas perçus comme une critique, d’un nouvel étudiant risque d’augmenter l’attitude du « pay your mais simplement comme les réflexions d’un 1L sur l’ensemble. fees, get your Bs » - à éviter. L’éducation en droit – un moyen ou une fin? Introduction du High Pass / Pass / Fail La faculté nous le dit haut et fort dès notre première journée d’intégration : McGill ne forme pas des avocats, elle forme des juristes. L’emphase est sur la théorie, l’analyse critique, les fondements philosophiques, et l’impact des courants sociaux des systèmes juridiques, et que très peu sur les questions de pratique. Notre faculté de droit, comme elle aime bien le dire, n’est pas une Law School qui forme des avocats comme une école de métier forme des plombiers. Je ne suis certainement pas le seul à y sentir une certaine odeur d’élitisme (mépris? c’est peutêtre trop loin), mais c’est l’ambition de la faculté. Je crois que cette ambition est légitime. Il faut cependant se rappeler que dans l’ambition, la réalité doit toujours figurer. Est-ce que cette vision cadre avec les attentes et les ambitions des étudiants de la faculté? Est-ce important? Sans nier que l’éducation juridique est une fin en soi, nos attentes ne s’y limitent pas – qu’on se le dise, la majorité d’entre nous sommes ici pour apprendre à devenir avocats, tandis que le mot « avocat » n’apparaît qu’une seule fois dans le document de 15 pages. Le programme proposé fait aussi l’introduction, à petite échelle (seulement dans les cours remplaçant Legal Meth), d’un système d’évaluation « High Pass / Pass / Fail ». Je comprends l’attrait d’un système « Pass / Fail » strictement binaire, mais l’ajout d’un « High Pass », pour moi, c’est changer quatre 30-sous pour une piasse. Je ne vois simplement pas la différence entre un système « High Pass / Pass / Fail » et un système où on limite les professeurs à « A / B / F », sauf qu’on aura maintenant deux types de notes différentes sur nos relevés (et une chose de plus à expliquer aux employeurs qui les demandent). Je sais que cette méthode est utilisée par d’autres programmes de droit, mais en soi ce n’est pas une raison pour nous de le faire. Si l’intention est d’en faire une véritable classe « Pass / Fail », je n’y vois pas de problème, mais le plan proposé semble plutôt être un entre-deux incertain. Je n’ai aucun doute que les discussions sur ce sujet ont été importantes lors de la dernière refonte du programme, et aussi lors du développement des propositions actuelles. Je suis aussi largement en faveur de la direction proposée – dans mon expérience, la pratique s’apprend sur le tas de toute façon. Je serais cependant curieux d’en savoir plus sur les démarches et le raisonnement qui ont mené à cette direction. Et le bien-être? Avec respect pour le travail accompli, je constate aussi qu’il manque quelque chose aux propositions : un regard sérieux vers l’impact du programme sur le bien-être et la santé des étudiants. Nous avons, cette année, mis de côté 50,000$ pour la santé mentale continue des étudiants. Il me semble que la conjonction actuelle est idéale pour se pencher sur l’impact du curriculum sur le bien-être des étudiants. On affirme, dans le document, que l’éducation en droit est un effort humaniste, dévoué à la poursuite de la sagesse, et qui a une valeur en soi. On doit prêcher par l’exemple. Un souci pour notre bien-être collectif me semble un objectif qui découle naturellement des valeurs humanistes. QN • 3 FEB 2015 •5 Une réelle politique et vision de bien-être étudiant, intégrée directement dans le curriculum de la faculté, serait un message puissant que la faculté pourrait envoyer au monde juridique. Cela serait aussi une confirmation de plus que la faculté de droit de McGill est progressiste et inclusive. Pourquoi ne pas intégrer directement dans le curriculum des structures de support, similaires à celles qui existent déjà de façon ad hoc dans la faculté (comme les Law Partners et le rôle informel des Tutorial Leaders)? Le nouveau programme de Problem Solving, en petits groupes, me semble l’occasion idéale pour y ajouter un système de support entre étudiants, professeurs, et administration facultaire. Law III MIREILLE FOURNIER ON ARCHITECTURE THOUGHTS ON CURRICULUM REFORM The conversation on curriculum reform is an important conversation. As I read the proposal, however, my thoughts go to another conversation: one that happens perhaps on a more informal basis, between students and faculty members (mostly separately I presume), and perhaps in seminars where it is called “the subject matter” of the discussion. I am speaking of the conversation about teaching and learning practices at the faculty of law. Many of my colleagues will say that these are two distinct conversations. I disagree. sibility of personal interpretations. Of course, there were a few rare classes that did not fit this model. There are always exceptions. But the proportion was overwhelming. In my second year, my classes were very similar: focused on doctrinal architecture, listing authorities, some of my colleagues using summaries to prepare for exams—because they could, because the type of information needed to do well on exams had already been set down and codified by others. A lot of my classes were built around textbooks, leaving theory to the introduction and providing small excerpts of cases, drastically limiting the pos- I think the capstone course is a great idea, but while the proposal states that it requires students “to reason with materials that cross boundaries,” (7) it strikes me that the “notable” examples of this project are still “Policy-Formation, Lobbying, and Legislative Drafting”—all state-centered modes of communication, prescribing for state-law materials to be invoked, and thus engendering the same problem as fact-pattern-and-policy-examination. As for Thus my comment on the curriculum reform is a comment on architecture. It is important to consider the names of classes, their order, what they will cover over which period of time and how many credits each will be allocated. But the story of my education at McGill shows, I think, that some essential practices shape the experience of students at the faculty, independently from grand In my first year, I was taught in the “Transsystemic method” architecture. Of course architecture influences the way people (also commonly referred to as drinking the McGill Kool-Aid). This live, but perhaps, in this case, it distracts from something impormeans I had courses in civil and common law, and this was said to tant. Why put so much effort into finding the best way to design, challenge my “prevailing assumptions about law.” Yet, I observe, into managing and organizing, if essential preconceptions we my evaluations were all framed in the same way. In December, have about what it means to learn the law remain unchallenged? I wrote fact patterns and policy questions for all of my classes except Methodology and Foundations. The distinction between curriculum and teaching and learning practices does not allow for the holistic discussion needed to By April, it appears I knew “how to write a law exam.” My achieve the vision the curriculum reform proposal sets forth. studying methods were substantially influenced by the way I Let us look at some practices suggested by the proposal. The expected to be evaluated: focus on the legal doctrines, list off the problem-solving course, for example, focuses on “Adjudication, authorities, the right kind of authorities—doctrinal and theoMediation, Negotiation, Policy-Formation, Litigating, Appelretical authors and non-law (historical and contextual) sources late Advocacy, Lobbying, Counseling/Advising, Legislative and mysteriously disappeared from my notes. To be honest, I was far Contractual Drafting.” (5) While providing diverse forms of from experiencing pluralism then, far from looking for law beside evaluation, the course retains a legalistic undertone, and remains and beyond the state, I was looking at what (I thought) mattered. essentially state-law-oriented. (The proposal itself goes from I know my courses were taught in a theoretically sensitive way, speaking of students in terms of “no matter what they choose they were well articulated and well designed, and yet they led me to do after graduation” (3) to describing new courses needed for to a specific kind of legal thinking. Not the one described in the “today’s lawyer” (6)...) Where are we supposed to reconsider the curriculum reform project. division between theory and practice? QN • 3 FEV 2015 •6 the insistence on “experiential learning,” the danger lies in treating clinics, clerkships and other positive-law oriented projects as obvious “experiences” and others, like various types of political and social engagement, and theoretical research, as “not (legally) experiential enough.” I do not have concerns with the coherence of the project presented. I entirely trust that its architecture is sound and, if possible, more elegant than the one we have right now. My concern remains with how people teach and learn within the curriculum. Perhaps it is best for these conversations to remain informal, but informal does not mean unimportant. If legal pluralism is experienced (or not) both in the what and the how of our classes, our conversations about the practices of our community ought to come to bear. FACULTY OF LAW presents / FACULTÉ DE DROIT présente Professor Joanne St. Lewis ANNIE MACDONALD LANGSTAFF WORKSHOP SERIES Faculty of Law / Faculté de Droit CO-HOSTED BY THE BLACK LAW STUDENTS ASSOCIATION OF MCGILL (BLSAM) University of Ottawa / Université d’Ottawa The public is cordially invited. “Why does the Ferguson Discussion in the States Matter so Much to Black Canadians?” 6 février 2015 13h00 to 14h30 Pavillon Chancellor-Day Salle Room 202, NCDH 3644, rue Peel QN • 3 FEB 2015 •7 BLSAM RADLAW WOCC THE BLACK LAW STUDENTS’ ASSOCIATION AT MCGILL (BLSAM), COMMUNAUTÉ JURIDIQUE RADICALE ÉTUDIANTE DE MCGILL (RADLAW), AND THE WOMEN OF COLOUR COLLECTIVE (WOCC) JOINT STATEMENT ON THE RENEWAL AND REFORM OF THE B.C.L./LL.B. CURRICULUM AT THE FACULTY OF LAW This statement is in response to the McGill Faculty of Law’s Curricular Reform Proposal, and the process of acquiring student feedback, including the Public Consultation on Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at Thomson House. A. Process a limited opportunity for students with ideas and concerns to submit to the Quid Novi. Students are one of the most important--if not the most important--stakeholders to any curriculum reform. If the Quid is really the only forum available that is truly “public,” then students and professor alike should have been given more notice about this special edition of the Quid. For the curricular reform to be truly inclusive, relevant, valuable and have staying power the next 15 years of McGill students and professors, then the Faculty’s administration and committee need to dramatically change the method of public consultations. A firm commitment to public consultation requires an open, transparent and accessible process to ensure that the voices of all stakeholders are not only included but are the guiding force behind the curricular reform. Such a commitment is also essential for upholding accountability to the voices of stakeholders. In the Fall of 2012, the Law Students Association of McGill passed “A Motion For a Substantial Student Role in Decisions About Course Offerings and Course Content.” The main student group behind this resolution was RADLAW, a club that has a history of heavy involvement in advocating for curriculum reform. Strangely, RADLAW, along with clubs such as the Student Association for Linguistic Rights/Association étudiante pour les droits linguistiques, was not invited to the “public” consultation regarding the present curricular reform. The “public” consultation was by invitation only, with only one student from each group allowed to attend. According to organizers, the public consultation was not recorded or transcribed. Members of groups were told that the contents of B. Law Education and Curriculum Objectives the consultation would be summarized only, and students could write a submission to the Quid if they wanted to share their ideas Relations of power fundamentally shape our society. Legal in print form. institutions play an essential role in both maintaining systems of oppression as well as opportunities to confront them. Since this In recent years, we note that there have been a few informal reality informs the legal framework of our society, we feel that a opportunities for input throughout process leading up to curricu- responsive and progressive legal education must directly express lum reform. However, there has not been a widespread concerand reflect these realities throughout its curriculum. This must ted effort to solicit students’ perspectives and proposals for include literacy about how race, gender, class, sexuality, disabisubstantive, content-based reforms to the curriculum. Members lity and other sites of power manifest in legal institutions and from our respective student groups attended many of these legal relations. We believe all students must be given significant informal processes in the past few years. The message commuopportunity to engage with these issues in order to gain necesnicated to the students was that the curricular reform would be sary knowledge and skills. Many of the following comments and more focused on pedagogical methods, such as introducing a flip- ideas reflect our belief that this understanding should be a focus classroom, or problem-based learning, rather than substantive, of the McGill Law curriculum. content-based reform to the curriculum. Transsystemic education is the claim to fame of McGill’s curriThe process was deeply disappointing. Meaningful public culum; the successful implementation of a new transsystemic consultation was limited to an invitation-only event that excluded curriculum should not be at the exclusion of the exploration and certain student groups and did not provide open access to the acknowledgement of systemic legal problems pertaining to race, process undertaken to introduce and approve new changes. gender, class, sexuality and disability. Law as truth and as the tool In effect, the January 27th event amounted to using student of justice when applied through a lens that ignores race, class and representatives from select-groups to rubberstamp a process and gender, among other intersecting identities, is completely divorreform that had already been decided upon. We are also deeply ced from people’s material and lived reality and is converted into disturbed that in the absence of full transparency and accouna tool of oppression and repression. McGill’s law faculty has a tability at the 2-hour January 27th event, that there was such responsibility to its students and to their future clients to ground QN • 3 FEV 2015 •8 them in the realities of the ways communities experience law and the legal system. This will only be achieved upon the introduction of curricula that acknowledge the foundations of law in racist, classist, sexist and colonialist ideology and how that still informs the institutions of law; one that commits to a truly diverse law faculty and student body, reflective of a cross-section of society, and enabling real engagement in the issues affecting the most marginalized in a non-tokenistic manner; and one that values and elevates actions beyond the classroom, actions that aim at transformation and social and economic justice. C. General Problems of Pedagogy In the past several years, memberships of our respective organizations have observed the preponderance of pedagogical approaches that decontextualize and de-emphasize matters where systemic issues of race, gender, class and sexuality are at play. For instance, our first year Extra-Contractual Obligations/ Torts class discussed the Supreme Court case Augustus v Gosset (1996 3 SCR 268) which deals with a mother’s suit against a police officer who fatally shot her black son in Montreal. However, when this matter was brought up in some of our classes, the role of racial bias and the disproportionate force used against young black people by police officers in North America were removed from the discussion. activity as an appropriate exercise. The film is demeaning to the subjects it depicts. It was made prior to the decolonization of Ghana and all other countries in sub-Saharan Africa. It reinforces the most crude and debasing stereotypes of people of African descent--that they are savage, barbarian, and sub-human. We describe these instances that occur in our classes to provide context for our concerns and reasons for our disappointment in the lack of transparency in the outreach preceding the curriculum reform. Our program cannot move towards greater inclusiveness and attention to diversity without hearing from how students, particularly students of colour, are impacted when issues of race are brought up in the classroom without a recognition of the presence of racism as one of the predominant structural forces that impacts the membership of the judiciary and plays a role in the outcome of cases. C.1. Indigenous Law We are pleased that the Faculty, in reforming the first-year curriculum, has integrated Indigenous Property into the curriculum and that Indigenous Law is to be explored in the first-year Integration Week. However, we have concerns about the method and emphasis that will be given on this portion of the curriculum. Given the lack of a full-time Indigenous Faculty member or a Faculty member whose research concerns Indigenous property in Quebec and the rest of Canada, the support for this curriculum change does not seem to be there. It also remains unclear what teaching methodology will engage this curriculum. Will this be a tokenistic perspective that does not engage the historical context, the subjugation of indigenous peoples under colonial regimes of Britain and France, and the ongoing application of the Indian Act, colonial legislation that maintains the power to define ‘Indians’ and ‘non-Indians’? Many students have observed that when any legal issues that engage Indigenous perspectives, or concern reserve/non-reserve relations, terms such as “we” or “us” are used to refer to European settlers/non-indigenous peoples and terms such “they” or “them” describe indigenous peoples. These problematic binaries erase the presence of indigenous students at the faculty as well as people of colour. Other instances of decontextualized cases and materials from their historical, social and political context should be rectified. In Common Law Property, the US Supreme Court case Dred Scott v Sandford is presented without reference to the fact that the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court was a slaveholder and that the decision is widely regarded as the worst decision in the history of the United States Supreme Court. The case was also taught without reference to the abundance of racial epithets and racist depictions of African Americans in the judgment. While attention was paid to the fact that the basis of the decision drew from similar intellectual bases of the common law of property, there was no attempt to contextualize the history of pre-Civil War America (prior to the 14th Amendment). In our discussions with leading legal scholars and students of colour at US law schools, we note that this case is taught as a constitutional law case as it should seem an obvious proposition that people of African D. Social Justice Law descent are not chattel that can be traded through a system of legalized bondage. We feel all law students should have substantial exposure to social justice law and movement lawyering as this will make for Earlier this month, in this year’s Foundations class, the 1955 better lawyers throughout the profession. However, at the very film “Les Maîtres Fous,” a “docufiction” directed by Jean Rouch, minimum, the Faculty should offer an adequate selection of courwas shown, a film that has been shown multiple times as part sework and other opportunities for students wishing to pursue of a 1L Foundations plenary session in previous years, despite careers in this area. the fact that students have expressed the problematic ways the film depicts African people in past Foundations courses. The film We think there are some positive suggestions to this end in the shows Ghanaian men frothing from the mouth, eating uncooked Curriculum Renewal proposal. We welcome the opportunity for dogs, and performing other disturbing acts. After screening the students to be able to participate in legal clinic education in their film this year to the 1L plenary session, the Professor instructed second year as this provides students with some of the best posstudents to brainstorm suggestions on how to restore the rule sible experience and exposure. We also welcome the suggestion of law in a fictitious African country called “Congeria.” As in past for the development of an accompanying legal clinic course-years, a number of students rejected this film and subsequent which preferably would be optional-- where critical issues related QN • 3 FEB 2015 •9 to social justice law could be explored, such as access to justice, innovative models of legal service delivery, and barriers and challenges faced by marginalized clients. However, in order to effectively implement this legal clinic component, the Faculty needs to: a.) devote more resources for the legal clinic program, and b.) find more legal clinic opportunities in Montreal. intellectual points of inquiry and engagement. Our demand also calls for a commitment to hire professors with core competencies in these perspectives and with publications and ongoing research that adds to the diversity of academic literature produced at the Faculty and presented to students. Additional Considerations. These examples should by no means be seen to limit the ways the curriculum can be enhanced to better respond to our concerns. There are many other ways that we can imagine social justice could be infused into the curriculum and the Renewal proposal. For example, the Problem Solving Course and components of the reformed Legal Ethics seminar can be used to explore social justice issues. Similarly, this should 1.) Poverty law. McGill’s offerings are considerably lacking in this be kept in mind as new courses are developed for the Interdisarea. The Law & Poverty course is a very welcome elective and ciplinary Basket. Finally, we think the Capstone project would enjoyed by students enrolled in the course but is limited due to provide an excellent opportunity for interested students to use its low-enrolment cap and theoretical focus. Students have to go their knowledge and skills in a project that is mutually beneficial to other universities to take poverty law staples such as Housing to local social justice organizing in Montreal. Law or Income Maintenance. As we have pointed out before, Droit Social is a mandatory course for all students at UQAM and a Conclusion course on Access to Justice is required of all first-year students at the University of Windsor’s Faculty of Law. We think all students As McGill’s transsystemic program continues to evolve, a genuine should be exposed to these topics, but at the very least students embrace of critical forms of understanding of the law, rather than who need these courses for their careers should have poverty law a merely theoretical recognition of «non-state legal orders» is options such as these offered on a regular basis. necessary. What is a truly «critical» understanding of the law? It is the recognition and realization that the maxims and self-legi2.) Business Associations. McGill made this course mandatory timizing ideology in which the law is placed, is a farce. The mere for students commencing their degrees in 2012-2013 in order concept of the law - a mechanism that works in the same way to comply with new required competencies of the Federation of for each citizen - must be deconstructed. Rather than merely Law Societies of Canada. At the time, we raised concerns that parroting tired liberal justifications of property, a critical property this was another mandatory course (taking away limited elective law course would seek to showcase the widespread inequacredits) introduced with a decidedly corporate focus. In a townlity that this institution supports. Contract law, as essentially a hall meeting discussing the change, Dean Jutras expressed that by-product of capitalism, ought to be examined as a means of a future option would be for the Business Associations course to domination. Foundations of Canadian Law should lead students widen in scope to cover a broader set of associations, including to question why jurisprudence is so historically male, and what non-governmental associations and non-profits. This would kinds of damage this has caused. Students should question claims make the course relevant to students interested in pursuing social that formal inclusion of women in the legal process has somehow justice law and movement lawyering. We think that renaming corrected an entire history of male domination. In short, critical the course and its description in such a way, and hiring profesunderstanding involves an institutional commitment to celebrasors/practitioners who could teach on and have experience with ting all perspectives on the law, even inconvenient ones. various forms of association, would allow it to be more relevant to a broader set of interests. A curriculum change that exposes students to marginalized perspectives on the law requires efforts beyond the scope of the 3.) Foundations of Canadian Law. The Faculty’s first-year course current curriculum changes. It requires an institutional com“Foundations of Canadian Law” has considerable potential to mitment to teaching law even in ways that are inconvenient or explore issues of power and social justice. Without wanting to troubling to hear. create a cookie-cutter course, we think it is important that legal theories and frameworks such as Critical Legal Theory, Critical We realize that the curriculum reform process in and of itself is Race Theory, Feminist Legal Theory (and their offshoots: Critical not a panacea to our concerns. The Faculty must be committed Race Feminism, QueerCrit, LatCrit and so on) are introduced to to include historically marginalized voices and identities, via students early in their legal studies and are present throughout professors who are equipped to teach the courses and topics their legal studies. Foundations provides a key opportunity to ex- we have been advocating. Professors and course lecturers have pose students to these theoretical perspectives as countervailing the onus of proposing courses that reflect these issues and then influences in response to dominant theoretical perspectives in ensuring their course materials allow for critical engagement with legal academia, yet not all sections even cover them. Professors questions of power and social justice. And finally, we as students teaching these courses should integrate these frameworks into have a responsibility to engage in our courses and commitments their syllabi as they imbibe their courses with their own preferred in the Faculty in ways that allow our peers and ourselves to There are additional measures the Faculty can take to make the curriculum more responsive to social justice and movement lawyering. We will highlight a few that we have advanced over the past few years, which we do not see addressed by the curricular reform. QN • 3 FEV 2015 • 10 become jurists equipped to be effective in the world we live in. content of their courses, especially required courses; We intend this statement to be a comprehensive overview of the many concerns of students in our respective organizations. We have a mandate to bring these issues forward as a means to advance engagement with our education and to improve the overall quality and inclusiveness of our legal education. We hope this discussion ignites critical reflection, conversation, and ultimately action among students, administrators, faculty, and the broader McGill community. WHEREAS other Quebec universities allow for student input into the content of each course; Please feel free to reach out to our respective groups: woccmcgill@gmail.com blsa.law@mail.mcgill.ca radlaw.mcgill@gmail.com Signed, The Women of Colour Collective (WOCC) McGill Radical Law Student Community (RADLAW) The Black Law Students Association at McGill (BLSAM) A MOTION FOR A SUBSTANTIAL STUDENT ROLE IN DECISIONS ABOUT COURSE OFFERINGS AND COURSE CONTENT WHEREAS some law faculties in Canada have mandatory courses in Access to Justice (Windsor), Social Rights (UQAM) and Aboriginal Law (UBC) that are either not even offered at McGill or not on a regular basis; WHEREAS students were inadequately consulted during the curriculum changes that took place last year; WHEREAS measures to address gaps in the course offerings, such as student-led seminars, are welcome but their constraints are too limiting; WHEREAS students have no representation in decisions about annual course offerings and each course’s content; BE IT RESOLVED that the Faculty Council Curriculum Committee student representatives canvas student ideas through town halls and/or written submissions to determine the best ways students can play a substantial role in decisions about course offerings and course material; 17 October 2012 BE IT RESOLVED that following this consultation, the Faculty Council Curriculum Committee student representatives organize WHEREAS the curriculum forms a fundamental part of a student’s a special General Assembly by the end of January 2013 to vote legal education; on the preferred method(s) of student input into course offerings and course content; WHEREAS students are the people most affected by decisions about course offerings and course content; BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that students play a substantial role in decisions about course offerings and course WHEREAS students are in a good position to know what types of content based on the results of this special GA; courses will be necessary or useful for their future careers and personal development; BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that students be allowed to take more than one student-led seminar for credit; WHEREAS the Faculty is currently undergoing a review of the curriculum; BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that the Faculty commit to offering any student-led seminar as a regular course after it has WHEREAS many students are disappointed with the Faculty been held three times. course offerings, including topic and language of instruction; WHEREAS many students are sometimes disappointed with the Contributor’s note Incorporation of Indigenous and Aboriginal Law Check out next week’s edition for reflections on this! QN • 3 FEB 2015 • 11 Law II PETER GRBAC CURRICULUM RENEWAL: A RESPONSE Introduction I applaud the spirit underlying the Curriculum Renewal Proposal (“Proposal”) and welcome a number of the envisioned changes. In particular, I praise the explicit pedagogical focus on problembased learning and the greater institutional recognition of Indigenous legal orders within our Faculty. While I believe that this Proposal represents a good start in the curriculum renewal process, I am of the opinion that methodological, pedagogical, and practical challenges remain to be addressed. I have organized my response to the Proposal under three broad headings – “Re-imagining how we teach”, “Re-imagining how we learn”, and “Re-imagining the spaces in which we teach and learn”. Under each heading, I articulate a response to some element(s) of the Proposal while offering concrete alternatives and suggesting questions to consider. My response is based entirely upon the distributed Proposal and my own knowledge of the institutional structures and political environment of our Faculty. Section 1: Re-imagining how we teach nothing new or useful to the student’s transcript and law school experience. Section 2: Re-imagining how we learn Affirming the continued importance and relevance of the local While the Proposal notes that the comparative thrust “should not lead one to think that our program ignores the particular or the local” (3) I remain unconvinced. In many respects, I believe the Working Group has placed far too much emphasis on comparison as a methodology. Comparison is but one way to approach the law. At a certain point, comparing one legal tradition with another breaks down as the intellectual pursuit (largely the utility of this pursuit) reaches a limit. Do the Immersion courses offer sufficient intellectual time and space for the student to study just one legal tradition on its own – to grapple with its unique theoretical and practical contours? Moreover, what space do we afford within the curriculum for a critical discussion of comparison as a methodology? Avoiding redundancy and respecting student choice Relatedly, I do not support the introduction of the Legal Traditions basket and the elimination of the separate Common and A key challenge raised by curriculum design is properly balanCivil Law baskets. This new basket prioritizes breadth over depth cing the pedagogical interests of the Faculty and the right of by preventing the student from exploring fully the legal tradition students to pursue an academic programme that suits their of his or her own choosing. Consider the case of a student who own needs and interests. The ideal curriculum, in my opinion, prefers the Common Law (over the Civil Law) and intends to is one of ‘structured flexibility’ that equips the student with begin his/her legal career in Toronto. The curriculum ought to the necessary foundational tools without being burdensome, facilitate this preference and choice by allowing the student to over-restrictive, and redundant. I take issue with two proposed tailor his/her course selection. This is not to say that the student courses and articulate my critique in the form of questions. First, should be allowed to abandon the Civil Law. If anything, the curI would recommend eliminating the required second-year course rent structure of transsystemic courses ensures that the student “Transsystemic Law in Global Context”. According to the Propoalways make reference to the civilian tradition. As much as sal, this new course is designed to “go beyond both (public and Transystemia is an intellectual project, it must also be a practical private international law) to include pluralist sources of law that one. We must recognize that the primary purpose of our Faculty transcend state borders” (6). If the Faculty still intends on offering is to train lawyers and that membership in a legal community (the public and private international law, what new skill-sets, metho- various bars) remains defined by specific legal traditions. Instead dological practices, or areas of knowledge will be developed by of eliminating the separate baskets, we should be creating new this new course? Can these issues not be raised and addressed courses that fit within each basket. The proposed tradition-speciwithin the respective international law courses? Put simply, what fic advanced property classes, therefore, are terrific additions to does “go beyond” mean in concrete terms? Second, I would the curriculum. recommend eliminating the required third-year Capstone Course. I believe that the supposed skills to be gained by this course are Innovating legal education sufficiently addressed in other courses, notably those of first year. What distinguishes the Capstone Course from any other course By far, the most disappointing aspect of the Proposal is the that uses a similar pedagogical structure? In my opinion, these section titled “Innovations in Experiential Learning”. Far from two required courses, cloaked in pedagogical buzzwords, add being innovative, the proposed changes do little to push learning QN • 3 FEB 2015 • 13 beyond the classroom walls of our Faculty. In response, I offer three alternative programming opportunities that operate on three distinct institutional levels. To be clear, the last two do not qualify as experiential learning per se, but I believe that they would provide fertile grounds to develop experiential learning opportunities. Within our Faculty, I propose the creation of a Legal Innovation Fund to be managed by a Legal Innovation Centre. This pool of money would be used to promote original student research, assist students and professors in launching cross-border legal projects (notably virtual ones), and foster greater collaboration between the Faculty’s various centres. Some examples of projects include funding a student to pursue comparative constitutional research in India and sponsoring the development of an app that furthers access to justice in different parts of the world. Each year, the Dean would host a challenge by selecting a pressing legal issue (global or local) and invite members of the McGill legal community to brainstorm a solution. This solution would be operationalized with the support of the Centre. Within our University, I propose greater collaboration between the Faculties by encouraging more dual degree programs and introducing certificate programs. The inspiration behind this proposal stems from the University of Toronto Faculty of Law’s recent expansion of their cross faculty programming. There, you can combine your law degree with Economics, English, Information Studies, Global Affairs, and Public Policy (to name but a few examples). Students are also able to pursue certificate programs within Aboriginal Studies, Environmental Studies, Jewish Studies, and Sexual Diversity and Gender Studies. Currently, our Faculty only offers two joint programs – the MBA with integrated B.C.L./ LL.B. (which is limited to a small number of students) and the MSW with integrated B.C.L./LL.B. (which, according to students who have attempted the joint degree, is covered in far too much red-tape). If we truly care about “exploit[ing] our interdisciplinary capacity and enabl[ing] students to work across doctrinal silos” (3), we must recognize first, that the Law Faculty operates within an intellectually rich and diverse university community that has much to offer our own Faculty, second, that our Faculty does not have the institutional capacity to offer the same breadth and depth of course materials available across McGill, and third, that true interdisciplinarity must push beyond the safe and structured confines of our own Faculty. Beyond our University, I propose stronger and more coordinated exchange opportunities. For all the discourse within the Proposal about legal education on a global scale, I was surprised to find little if any mention of opportunities to experience law abroad. There are limits to learning about legal traditions from a textbook; cosmopolitanism emerges through conversation and interactions with those who study and practice law beyond our own borders. We need to incentivize study abroad opportunities while forging stronger and more coordinated exchange programmes that are centered less on location and more on intellectual connections and academic themes. QN • 3 FEV 2015 • 14 Section 3: Re-imaging the spaces in which we teach and learn From the very beginning of the Proposal, there emerges the risk of forgetting that the twin processes of teaching and learning take place within the physical confines of our Faculty. Re-read the Faculty Council resolutions on the first page and note the language used – “Education on a global scale”, “the crossing of … boundaries”, and “cosmopolitan jurists”. Pursuing a globally focused curriculum reconfigured for problem-based learning is all well and good but do we have the financial resources and the physical spaces to make this curriculum a success? Effectively and fully promoting this new type of learning and teaching will require extensive renovations to the spaces of our Faculty. The rigid hierarchical set-ups of our lecture halls will have to give way to flexible classrooms. Moreover, investments will have to be made in technology (not just more electric plugs for our various devices but also enhanced video conferencing to enable cross-border collaboration). We must also appreciate that this new type of learning and teaching extends beyond the confines of the classroom. Informal discussions and debates of the law can be just as powerful as the formal ones. Think of the exchange student sharing her experience working for an international tribunal with a student from McGill Law. We need to build accessible, comfortable, diverse, and safe spaces that encourage interactions like this one to take place. Conclusion The curriculum renewal process invites us all – administrators, professors, and students – to grapple with how we think of the relationship between student and professor, the place of the Faculty both within the university and our wider society, and the very nature of legal instruction. The thought of transforming these various relationships is indeed exciting but I wonder how our conversation (and the results) surrounding curriculum renewal change if we think of this process as less of a renewal and more of a re-imagination? How would you re-imagine learning and teaching? I appreciate that financial constraints, bureaucratic hurdles (characterized by a “No can do” mentality), and personal agendas are inevitable forces to grapple with throughout this process but they need not define it. That is why I welcome the various voices filling this edition of the Quid and look forward to seeing how they will shape the Proposal and the institutional identity of our Faculty. BLG VOUS SOUHAITE BON SUCCÈS POUR LA COURSE AUX STAGES! Nous vous invitons à nous transmettre votre CV dès maintenant. Au plaisir de faire votre connaissance. NOUS NE SOMMES PAS SEULEMENT À LA RECHERCHE D’AVOCATS EXCEPTIONNELS, MAIS SURTOUT D’ÊTRES D’EXCEPTION. Pour consulter les fiches biographiques de nos avocats et voir si BLG répond à vos aspirations, visitez le site blg.com/students/fr Calgary | Montréal | Ottawa Toronto | Vancouver Avocats | Agents de brevets et de marques de commerce Borden Ladner Gervais S.E.N.C.R.L., S.R.L. est une société à responsabilité limitée de l’Ontario. blg.com SAO Corner SAO OFFICE HOURS FOR 2015 Mondays & Wednesdays: 10am to 2pm Tuesdays/ Thursdays: 9am to 12:30pm & 2-‐4pm Fridays: 10am-‐12pm HOW SUBMIT ASSIGNMENTS TO THE SAO Use your McGill email only DECEMBER EXAM VIEWING AT THE SAO Les étudiants et étudiantes peuvent se présenter au Secrétariat des études en droit, pour consulter leurs exams d’automne 2014 jusqu’au 1. 2. Send to Saoassignments.law@mcgill.ca CC Professor (unless otherwise specified) 3 février, 2015 de 9h00-‐12h30 et 14h00-‐16h00. 3. 4. Email suject line: Course Name – Assignment Name Email Body: Student Name – McGill ID# OFFICIAL GRADE REVIEW REQUEST DEADLINE Tuesday February 3, 2015 5. Save assignment as follows: Course Name – Assignment Name – Iden^fier (Iden^fier: as specified by the professor ) McGill/Shantou Summer Law Program (3 credits) This year, the program is offered in Montreal, May 18-‐29, 2015. The focus for the 2015 edi^on is on two broad themes, the rule of law, and disability and human rights. ROBSON HALL'S ISRAEL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW PROGRAM AT HEBREW UNIVERSITY For more informa^on about the program, please see the course website: hbp://law.robsonhall.ca/ hebrew-‐university-‐ summer-‐program hbp://www.mcgill.ca/law-‐ studies/undergrad-‐ programs/summer/ mcgillshantou-‐summer-‐ law-‐program McGill Law students who complete the program will receive 4 outside Law elec^ve credits. Deadline: Monday, February 9, 2015, 15:00 Deadline: February 5, 2015 February 2015 SAO Events Introduc<on to Mindfulness Based Stress Management Workshop (offered by McGill Counselling Services) Ask an Advisor! Clinical Legal Educa<on Open House Drop-‐in, Ques<on & Answer Session Wednesday, February 18, 1:00-‐2:30pm, Monday, February 23, Atrium 1:00-‐2:30pm, Atrium Wednesday, February *Pizza will be served* *lunch will be served* 25, 1:00-‐2:30pm, NDCH 200 WELLNESS • Law Peer to Peer Support Program / Programme de souGen des pairs en droit -‐ Drop In hours! Mercredi de 13h00 à 14h30, NCDH 203 Jeudi de 11h30 à 13h00, NCDH 203 Excep&ons: Jeudi de 11h30 à 12h30 dans la salle NCDH 203 seulement du 29 janvier au 19 février. • COUNSELLING WORKSHOPS AND GROUPS Workshops unGl February 6th, 2015 hTp://www.mcgill.ca/ counselling/ CONTESTS/SUBMISSIONS/AWARDS hTp://www.mcgill.ca/law-‐studies/informaGon/ funding/external • U21 UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH CONFERENCE 2015 IN NEW ZEALAND – JULY 6-‐10, 2015 Deadline: Wednesday, February 11 at 3pm • CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE ET D’INDUSTRIE CANADA-‐LIBAN Date limite: vendredi 20 février 2015 • The Dalai Lama Fellow (DLF) Program L'AssociaGon du Barreau canadien (ABC): Concours de dissertaGon 201520 • Date limite: février, 2015; 8 bourses d’études de 3 000 $ CAN Law II RÉFLEXIONS SUR LA RÉFORME DU CURRICULUM SUZANNE ZACCOUR J’ai décidé de coucher sur papier quelques idées et préoccupations qui me sont venues en tête, spontanément, à la lecture de la proposition de réforme du programme de B.C.L./LL.B. Il ne s’agit pas d’un document travaillé ou d’un brillant exercice de style, mais je le partage tout de même ici pour laisser des traces des questionnements et des remarques que je n’ai pas eu l’occasion d’exprimer lors de la consultation publique de la semaine passée. Ça sera, par la même occasion, votre chance d’enfin me lire dans le Quid dans un contexte qui n’est pas, disons, «confrontational». Première année programme taillé sur mesure (par exemple, encore une fois, en choisissant plutôt des cours de droit criminel, ou alors en prenant des cours de droit public). Les cours de 2e année ont beaucoup en commun (plutôt de droit privé, ancrés dans les traditions et/ou le droit positif, etc.), et certainEs étudiantEs risquent de voir leur intérêt chuter étant donnée la flexibilité réduite du parcours. Cet enjeu est particulièrement important du fait de la course aux stages en 2e année : idéalement, il faut que les étudiantEs aient eu l’occasion de cerner les domaines de droit qui les intéressent dès leur 3e session. Comment le faire s’ielles n’ont pas la chance de prendre un cours de droit de la famille, de droit autochtone ou de taxes, par exemple? La propriété transsystémique, c’est une surprise plus que bienvenue. Après avoir entendu pendant toute une année que les droits Mon changement préféré à la deuxième année est la possibilité des biens étaient irréconciliables, voilà que la plupart de nos de réaliser des crédits hors cours de type « Legal Clinic » dès la cours de Common Law Property réfèrent au droit civil. deuxième année. C’est encore une fois un peu artificiel étant donné le nombre de crédits laissés au choix de l’étudiantE, mais Ce qui me plait moins, c’est qu’on enlève la possibilité de prendre je me répète. Il faudrait cependant que la limite de 15 crédits le cours de droit criminel en première année. Pour quelqu’une hors cours soit modifiée, ce qui n’est pas, à mon souvenir, indiqué qui veut pratiquer dans ce domaine, c’est problématique, étant dans la proposition. 15 crédits, ce n’est vraiment pas tant que ça. donné que les cours de droit criminel ont tous beaucoup de Je me fie à mon expérience personnelle : ayant fait un stage interprérequis, et ne se donnent qu’une fois par année. Développer national en première année et ayant l’intention de faire un moot, un bon bagage en droit criminel devient plus difficile sans Droit une clerckship et un cours de legal clinic, je dois faire une croix pénal en 2e session (et les changements en 2e année) : on sait sur le McGill Law Journal ou l’expérience de TL ou de TA. Cepenpourtant que les stages au DPCP sont très contingentés, et que dant, si cette limite est imposée pour donner l’opportunité à plus certaines opportunités comme Innocence McGill demandent d’étudiantEs de profiter de ces expériences, elle me parait alors d’avoir pris des cours de droit criminel. plus appropriée que s’il s’agit de nous forcer à prendre un certain nombre de cours. On peut toutefois deviner que le nombre Je suis assez favorable au fait d’ajouter des cours d’intégration et d’opportunités de cours de clinique juridique sera augmenté dans de « résolution de problème ». Cependant, ces cours « spéciaux » les prochaines années. demandent sans doute beaucoup de travail, et raccourcissent la session régulière et le temps imparti pour les autres cours. Étant Troisième ou quatrième année donné la volonté d’impliquer les étudiantEs dans plus d’apprentissage « clinique », espérons qu’une attention sera portée à Je vois ici un problème majeur : le fait que le cours d’intégration l’objectif de ne pas augmenter davantage la charge de travail déjà doive être pris en dernière session rend impossible le fait de lourde des McGilloisEs. terminer en échange (ou en été?). Il devrait pouvoir se prendre à l’automne ou à l’hiver, au choix. Pour qu’il soit significatif, il deDeuxième année vrait, à mon sens, valoir plus de deux crédits. Je propose comme point de départ un projet que l’étudiantE devrait créer en groupe Je suis sceptique par rapport à l’obligation de prendre Droit des ou en solo, par exemple une clinique d’information juridique affaires et Droit judiciaire en première année. Bien que JICP soit itinérante dans le métro, un blogue juridique de style Éducaloi, un prérequis utile pour plusieurs cours et éventuellement pour un travail de recherche de « terrain », etc. Ça permettrait aux d’autres expériences juridiques, Droit des affaires est plus spéétudiantEs de cibler le type d’expérience dont ielles jugent qu’il cifique. Ce changement porte à 20 crédits le nombre de crédits est manquant à leur formation, et d’exercer leur créativité – sous obligatoires en deuxième année. Entre les contraintes d’horaire la supervision d’unE professeurE. En dernière session, c’est le et la limite au nombre de cours qu’on peut prendre, on réduit moment de laisser aux presque finissantEs un peu de liberté. significativement la liberté des étudiantEs de se construire un QN • 3 FEV 2015 • 18 Paniers et exigences problèmes de santé mentale. Étant donné que la faculté sélectionne des étudiantEs qui ont donné la preuve qu’ielles étaient J’aurais aimé plus d’informations pour comprendre pourquoi les travaillantEs, je ne vois pas de raison d’écarter la proposition de cours de droit du travail et de droit de l’immigration ne feront passer à cours sans notes. Ça, ça serait radicalement différent de plus partie du « panier » de cours en droits humains. Je note au ce que font les autres universités! De toute façon, les notes sont passage que les cours qui remplissent plusieurs exigences, par au final assez uniformes, ce qui génère d’ailleurs beaucoup de exemple Law and Poverty, sont un outil important pour les étufrustration chez les étudiantEs. Pendant que j’y suis, et au risque diantEs qui terminent en 3 ans. de sembler paresseuse (en droit, l’équilibre est confondu avec la paresse), la charge de travail en termes de quantité de lectures L’idée de rendre obligatoire un cours de droit international me (lectures qui, soyons franches, sont rarement lues dans leur parait étrange : les cours obligatoires sont là pour s’assurer que totalité) doit être repensée. La faculté devrait au moins fournir les étudiantEs aient l’occasion de prendre et prennent effective- aux professeurEs (qui, peut-être, ont oublié ce que c’est qu’une ment des cours qui leur seront essentiels. Or, le cours de droit session à 18 crédits?) une quantité de lecture suggérée et une international public est donné à chaque session, est un prérequis quantité de lectures maximale. Moins de lectures, ce n’est pas à plusieurs cours et contient un assez grand nombre d’étudiantEs. moins de travail : c’est un travail plus approfondi, moins de stress, Il semble clair que celles et ceux qui jugent qu’une carrière et plus d’égalité (pensons notamment aux étudiantEs parents ou internationale est possible peuvent facilement suivre et suivent qui travaillent à temps partiel). ce cours. Tant qu’à augmenter (de 3 crédits au total) le nombre de cours obligatoire – ce qui n’est pas anodin, surtout pour les Un mot sur la pratique du litige qui est très peu enseignée à la programmes en trois ans –, je pense qu’on pourrait en faire un faculté. J’ai eu l’occasion de suivre le cours de Civil Litigation meilleur usage (suspense! J’en parle plus loin). Workshop, l’occasion d’un apprentissage considérable. Ce cours et Trial Advocacy sont cependant « contingentés » et, surtout, Ayant suivi le cours de Critical Engagement with Human Rights, toujours donnés le soir, un horaire qui ne convient pas à toutes je trouve intéressant de l’obliger aux étudiantEs qui ont fait un les situations. Je crois que la faculté devrait offrir Civil Litigation stage, quel qu’il soit. Ce cours est enrichissant et se démarque Workshop, ou un cours de litige, de façon intensive l’été. Comme des autres. Je me permets de supposer qu’il ne devra cependant il y a la possibilité de se lancer dans l’apprentissage de la médiaêtre pris qu’une fois… Aussi, notons qu’on monte désormais à 23 tion ou de l’arbitrage par le biais de programmes d’été, le litige ne crédits obligatoires en deuxième année (pour celles et ceux qui doit pas être mis de côté. En plus de l’importance du litige pour font le stage en première année, comme c’était mon cas). un bon nombre d’avocatEs, le développement de la confiance en soi et de l’assurance (surtout chez les femmes) passe par une Les oubliéEs : ce que j’aurais aimé voir dans cette réforme pratique du litige qui ne commence pas le jour où la vie d’une cliente est en jeu! À mon sens, il faudrait absolument ajouter une exigence de suivre un cours critique de 3 crédits, parmi un panier qui contien- Pour finir, je crois que la réforme du curriculum est l’occasion de drait des cours tels Feminist Legal Theory, Critical Legal Theory, repenser non seulement ce qu’on enseigne, mais aussi comment. Queer Legal Theory… Ce sont des cours qui sont rarement donnés Je suis sûre que vous me voyez venir : je voudrais voir une prise (ou en même temps que des cours obligatoires de deuxième de position claire et forte en faveur d’un enseignement non année…), et donc que les étudiantEs n’ont pas l’occasion de sexiste. En plus de celles dont j’ai déjà abondamment parler la prendre même lorsqu’ielles le souhaitent. Lors de la consultasession passée, dans le cadre du projet pour un enseignement tion publique sur la réforme, il a été question d’implication et de non sexiste, plusieurs mesures peuvent être prises pour favoriser justice sociales. Il faut questionner la vision du droit comme soit l’égalité des chances entre les étudiantEs. Que les cours obliganeutre et extérieure à toute préoccupation sociale, soit solution toires ne soient donnés qu’entre 10h et 16h, par exemple, facilite à un problème social (clinique juridique, pro-bono…). Parfois le la conciliation parentalité-études. Un exercice profond de remise droit est précisément le problème, et les juristes forméEs par en question de la reproduction des oppressions au sein de la McGill doivent IMPÉRATIVEMENT prendre conscience de leurs faculté (malgré les mesures déjà prises en faveur de l’égalité) doit privilèges. être réalisé dans les plus brefs délais. C’est peut-être un sujet qui sera abordé plus tard dans le processus de réforme, mais la discussion sur la façon de noter les cours est absente de la proposition. Périodiquement, des étudiantEs de Radlaw principalement ramènent sur la table l’idée de n’avoir que des cours de type pass/fail. McGill prends le soin de sélectionner des candidatEs très impliquéEs dans leur milieu… et aussitôt admisEs, celleux-ci mettent fin à ces implications, étant donnée une charge de travail écrasante. McGill nous « désimplique », ce que cette réforme prétend éviter. On sait également que les études en droit sont corrélées avec de nombreux et fréquents QN • 3 FEB 2015 • 19 Law II JACOB SCHWEDA EXPERIENTIAL (NOT EXPLOITATIVE) EDUCATION Like many in our community, I am excited by some aspects of the proposed curriculum reform released last week. A desire for increased experiential education, however, gives me pause. I am concerned that “experiential” learning will in fact continue to be a euphemism for the exploitation of our students for free or cheap labour. are eliminated and the motivation to fight for funding is diminished when a community group can rely on hundreds of free hours of student work every semester. Organizations pay students when they can and when grant money allows. The problem is that minimum wage laws are not optional. They represent a societal consensus about the miniThe proposal itself acknowledges that “[a]s things stand, a large mum amount that must be paid for each hour of someone’s time. number of students engage in activities such as clinical placeThey are public order provisions and cannot be contracted out of. ments, internships and judicial clerkships” and hopes that “these Even when there are narrow exceptions for students, we should opportunities can be expanded in the future.” Although students not forget the spirit behind these basic workplace protections. do gain invaluable experience through existing opportunities, it is Our time has real value. not clear that they should continue in their current form. Increased use of free student labour may even open up the A good example is the Faculty’s own use of Tutorial Leaders Faculty and other organizations to potential liability. Take our (TLs) and Group Assistants (GAs). Under the guise of providing own Legal Information Clinic, for example, which pays its direcstudents with teaching and research experiences, these positions tors during the summer and asks them to pay tuition to work for actually require participants to pay tuition to perform work that credit during the school year. It’s not clear to me why (ironically, is paid employment in other faculties at McGill. The result is for a legal information clinic) we believe a service that is clearly that students teach tutorials, assist with lesson plans, and help an employment relationship during the summer can magically grade papers for the benefit of professors. Asking the youngest become one exempt from minimum wage laws in the fall. members of our community (students), who face an unsure job market and high levels of debt, to pay tuition in order to work for The Commission des normes du travail’s Interpretation Guide the wealthiest and most established members of our community echoes many of these concerns. It acknowledges that it “is (professors) is unjust. sometimes hard to determine what constitutes voluntary work… However, alleging that the smooth operation of the enterprise Our students also provide legal information and other services does not require the hiring of new employees… or that the worfor free to community organizations. Our students provide legal kers agreed to work for free does not justify non-compliance with information about pensions, housing, and welfare benefits at labour standards… [O]ne cannot claim that the worker agreed to Project Genesis. We provide research support on all fields of law work on a voluntary basis.”1 To determine if someone is entitled at the Mile End Legal Clinic. Other examples abound. Although to the minimum wage, the Commission will ask: whether the this work directly benefits those in need in our communities, it person is performing any work whatsoever, whether there is a also benefits McGill financially when it is done for credit. Tuition relationship of subordination between the employer and the fees and government subsidies are, paradoxically, paid to McGill employee, etc. to rubber stamp work done outside of the university. None of that money flows to the lawyers and other staff who supervise We are a community of bright jurists. However, even if we are and train our students in those community organizations. able to come up with a clever way to evade minimum wage laws, it will not render the practices I have highlighted ethical or Students are also occasionally asked to work for free (or to appropriate. pay tuition to work) for the Quebec government (through, for example, clerkships) or for private lawyers. This is another There are a number of responses to the concerns I have presexample of asking relatively vulnerable members of the legal ented. Some would emphasize the value of the experience that community to provide free labour to some of the wealthiest and students gain. While this may be true, experience is does not most established (particularly when providing support to judges). replace a fair wage. Many jobs in society are meaningful and provide experiences for learning. I imagine, for example, that being This constant supply of free student labour indirectly devalues a law professor is stimulating and educational, yet we do not ask the work done in community legal organizations. Entry-level jobs our professors to work for free (and with good reason: prestige QN • 3 FEB 2015 • 21 and experience do not pay your rent or buy you groceries). I will close with two positive notes. First, I acknowledge that many initiatives that exist for students were established in good Others might say that the Faculty or supervising lawyers or judges faith by a faculty keen to offer flexible and meaningful learning provide training and mentorship to students. Again, this may experiences. I am hopeful that our changing economic context be true. But that is also the case in paid employment (and, in and the desire to expand the law school student body beyond the fact, training periods must be paid under Quebec’s Act Respecwealthy (who can afford to work for free) will also convince those ting Labour Standards). In addition, students provide real value same faculty members that new safeguards are required. while learning and being trained: they research legal questions, interview clients, and draft bench memos. These tasks can only Second, there is real potential to include meaningful experiential be carried out after years of (expensive) post-secondary educalearning within classrooms themselves. The proposed curriculum tion and after acquiring a variety of skills that are without a doubt reform calls for this. Problem-based learning and other strategies worth at least $10.35 per hour. allow students to link concrete problems to academic theory. A good example is the approach used by Professor Campbell With this in mind, any addition of clinical “internships” or “place- and Dean Jutras, who integrate complex litigation, contract, and ments” must be carried out ethically and in conformity with the mediation problems into their Advanced Civil Law Obligations spirit and the letter of Quebec’s employment laws. McGill cannot class. Approaches such as the aforementioned can be delivered continue to ask students to pay hundreds (sometimes thousands) by McGill employees (professors), and it then becomes legitiof dollars in exchange for printing a credit count on a transcript mate to ask students (and the public purse) to pay tuition fees in to recognize the mentorship and training performed by third exchange. This integration, in my opinion, should be the focus of parties. If it chooses to recognize outside experiences that did not expanded experiential education at McGill. involve significant time and labour by McGill employees, it should not charge students to do so. It should also reflect very seriously In short, while experiential learning has great potential, some on its practice of requiring students to pay to obtain credits for serious reflection is required before we expand its use further in designing and delivering student-led seminars, a situation that order to ensure it is not exploitative. seems particularly exploitative. 1 Our Faculty should also be a staunch advocate for its students, See Interpretation Guide, “Interpretation” of section 40 of the Act Respecting Labour Standards. insisting that we are valuable enough to be paid for the time and effort that we expend. McGill is a leader in the Quebec legal market, and we are constantly told that our graduates are sought after. It’s time for the Faculty to walk the talk and insist that this translates into fair wages for work performed, no matter how meaningful or prestigious the opportunity. School of Community and Public Affairs TEMPORARY FOREIGN WORKERS: OPPORTUNITY OR MISFORTUNE? February 3, 2015, from 6:15 pm to 8:30 pm Concordia University, 1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd, Montreal, QC H3G 1M8, 7th floor Hall Building H-763 The School of Community and Public Affairs at Concordia invites the McGill Law community to a public panel on February 3, regarding the current Temporary Foreign Worker’s Program in Canada and the various approaches to render the program more efficient. - Marisa Berry Mendez (Settlement policy director at the Canadian Council for Refugees) - Enrique Llanes (community organizer with the Immigrant Worker’s Center) Moderator: - Brigitte Noel (CBC Journalist) More specifically, the guests will be describing the different contexts in which they work, while addressing the Charter of Rights as well as migrant worker’s rights. Each panellist will get the opportunity to present their experiences and perspective on Guests Speakers include: the approach for that they trust to be the most adequate way of - Eugenie Depatie-Pelletier (Migrant Worker’s Rights coordinator) changing the current Temporary Foreign Worker’s Program. QN • 3 FEV 2015 • 22 MIGNAULT MOOT CONCOURS DE PLAIDOIRIE PIERREBASILE MIGNAULT/MIGNAULT MOOT Après six longues années, le Concours de plaidoirie Pierre-Basile Mignault revient à McGill les 6 et 7 février 2015! After six long years, the Mignault Moot is coming once again to McGill! Les étudiants des six facultés canadiennes de droit civil vont débattre un jugement fictif devant les juges de la Cour suprême du Canada, de la Cour supérieure du Québec et de la Cour d’appel du Québec pour remporter des prix prestigieux. On February 6th and 7th 2015, students from the six Canadian faculties of Civil Law will be debating in front of judges from the Supreme Court of Canada, the Superior Court of Quebec and the Court of Appeal of Quebec to win prestigious awards. Vous êtes conviés à assister à cette compétition et à encourager les équipes de McGill! You are invited to attend this competition and support your McGill teams! QUAND? 6 février 2015 : 8h30 à 17h (rondes éliminatoires) 7 février 2015 : 10h à 11h (joute finale) WHEN? February 6th 2015: 8:30 am to 5 pm (elimination rounds) February 7th 2015: 10 am to 11 am (final round) OÙ? Salle du Tribunal-École Maxwell-Cohen, Pavillon New Chancellor Day, Faculté de droit de l’université McGill WHERE? Maxwell-Cohen Moot Court, New Chancellor Day Hall, McGill Law Faculty LES JUGES? THE JUDGES? Rondes éliminatoires: Elimination rounds: * L’honorable Pierrette Rayle, Cour d’appel du Québec (à la * The Honourable Pierrette Rayle, Court of Appeal of Quebec retraite) (présidente) (retired) (chair) * L’honorable David Collier, Cour supérieure du Québec * The Honourable David Collier, Superior Court of Quebec * L’honorable Julie Veilleux, Cour du Québec * The Honourable Julie Veilleux, Court of Quebec Joute finale: Final round: * L’honorable Clément Gascon, Cour suprême du Canada * The Honourable Clément Gascon, Supreme Court of (président) Canada (chair) * L’honorable Marie Deschamps, Cour suprême du Canada (à * The Honourable Marie Deschamps, Supreme Court of la retraite) Canada (retired) * L’honorable Pierre Dalphond, Cour d’appel du Québec (à la * The Honourable Pierre Dalphond, Court of Appeal of Queretraite) bec (retired) VOS ÉQUIPES DE MCGILL? Appelants: Frédérique Horwood Alexandra Belley-McKinnon Intimés: Rose Massicotte Mariève Barcelo Després Pour plus d’informations : http://concourspbm. ca/ YOUR MCGILL TEAMS? Appellants: Frédérique Horwood Alexandra Belley-McKinnon Respondents: Rose Massicotte Mariève Barcelo Després For more information: http://concourspbm.ca/ QN • 3 FEB 2015 • 23 colloque présente le interfacultaire de la ADED Confédération des associations des étudiantes et étudiants en droit civil à l’Université de Sherbrooke les 7 & 8 mars 2015 20 conférences de professionnels du droit banquet, hébergement & cocktail 300 participants des 6 universités Billets disponibles auprès de votre association étudiante dès février plus d’informations sur la page www.facebook.com/cadedcanada Law I SIMONE ABA AKYIANU THINKING ABOUT EQUITY AND INCLUSION The Preamble to Regulations in support of curricular renewal states that the Faculty of Law at McGill University is committed to “leadership in innovative legal education”, “scholarship across disciplinary and cultural boundaries”, and the “training of cosmopolitan jurists.” While the Committee’s intent to enhance the transformative quality of legal education is clear, equity and inclusion should be better prioritized. Some of the high points of the Report include: the incorporation of an Indigenous framework into the property course, the introduction of a capstone project, and increased opportunities for experiential learning. The focus on experiential learning and the capstone project present unique opportunities to develop creative lawyering skills and to collaborate in group projects. Speaking as a student parent in particular, participating in experiential learning opportunities may offer flexibility in day-to-day studentfamily balance and encourages engagement in areas of interest. and comparative legal education in ways that do not derive explicitly from a Western liberal lens. The report also stresses that the Faculty believes legal education calls upon “students and professors to deeply question operating assumptions about law and to seriously engage with law’s philosophical, historical, and social content.” Based on my experiences in first year thus far, I am skeptical of the extent to which students are able and encouraged to do this. Often, cases are presented in a deeply apolitical and ahistorical manner, lacking in the context necessary to critically interrogate the substantive outcomes and legal reasoning of judges. To present law in this manner perpetuates both ideological and material systems of structural violence that determine the distribution of social, economic and legal benefits in the first place. It also means that many of the narratives of racialized and indigenous communities are left out of the classroom altogether. Even At the same time, the increase in mandatory courses in second when stories of individuals or communities of colour are included year may pose significant challenges for student parents who are in classroom discussions, they tend to be presented in ways that attempting to organize a schedule that fits with family and school presume their passivity as “recipients” being acted upon by the demands. In taking the mandatory six courses this first year, I had law. Such portrayals profoundly dehumanize and disregard the to make sacrifices in terms of my involvement in volunteer and agency of people of colour, as well as their resilience and capacity student activities, not to mention in my own self-care practices. to determine their own lives. The end of the first semester was a particularly challenging period for me and it did not help that new course material was The Report is also silent on evaluative methods and forms of introduced the week before exams. The mandatory course load teaching. There is no comment about methods of evaluation, the has further implications when we consider that provincial loan amount of readings given, the time courses are offered or the schemes such as OSAP impose requirements of full-time study impact such work has on students with family responsibilities, in order to access funding. Having regard for the undue burdens and the wider student body whom we know deals with issues course requirements may pose for students juggling multiple of mental health, ranging from exhaustion to anxiety and other responsibilities should be an important part of the curriculum forms of psycho-social stress. reform process. Additionally, the curriculum reform project should go hand in Absent from the proposed changes to the curriculum is the imhand with active recruitment policies that aim to increase the portance of diversity and equity, with respect to race and social enrolment of low-income individuals, student parents, racialized justice more generally. The Report continuously emphasizes and indigenous students. If we are really to do justice to notions “comparative approaches” beyond the Canadian lens. However, of pluralism and the aim of producing “well-rounded” jurists, I find myself wondering what exactly is meant by comparative? a commitment to equity and inclusion is key. I hope that the And what traditions or perspectives will actually be compared? curriculum reform process will spur dialogue and action in these An emphasis on “comparative analysis” does not necessarily areas. guarantee or imply that the context or frame within which material will be taught will offer a critical lens on the legal issues and cases raised in class. Courses and perspectives such as critical race theory and feminist legal theory are presently absent from the mandatory curriculum scheme, and have been relegated to one-week sessions or brief interactions in a course. I hope the Committee will consider what it means to engage in transsytemic QN • 3 FEB 2015 • 25 Librarian svetlana kochkina LAW LIBRARY NEWS New Additions to our Digitised Collections: Law Exams from 1861-1896 and Mooters scrapbook from 19151916 We all know that e-exams for the past years are not available for the faculty of law. Not to exactly fill this gap, but to at least provide you with an insight into how the exams looked like for the 19th century McGill law students, we have digitized a volume from our Rare Books Collection that gathers the examination questions for the years 1861-1896. You can find there for example, the questions for the sessional examinations on the Civil Code for the second and third year students that were held on Tuesday, March 5th, 1872. Another glimpse into the student life of the days bygone is allowed by the scrapbook made by law students preparing for moot completion in in 1915-1916. The book contains handwritten accounts of the meetings, clippings from contemporary newspapers, a typewritten case Brown vs. Jones assigned to the students and the moot court decision. QN • 3 FEV 2015 • 26 Both books are now available for viewing and downloading via WorldCat: Examinations: http://mcgill.worldcat.org/oclc/893611291 Reports of moot trials: http://mcgill.worldcat.org/ oclc/893611839 Law Library blog, Facebook & Twitter The Law Library is on social media: • Read Law Library’s blog http://blogs.library.mcgill.ca/lawlibrary/ • Like our Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/NahumGelberLaw.Library • Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/McGillLawLibrar
© Copyright 2024