In contrast to quantitative studies that rely on numerical data to highlight racial disparities in police street checks, this article offers a qualitative methodology for examining how histories of anti-Blackness configure civilians’ experiences of present-day policing. Taking the Halifax Street Checks Report as our primary object of analysis, we apply an innovative dermatological approach, demonstrating how skin itself becomes meaningful when police officers and civilians make contact in the process of a street check. We explore how street checks become an occasion for epidermalization, whereby a law enforcement practice projects onto the skins of civilians locally specific histories and emotions. To think with skin, we focus on the narratives shared by African Nova Scotians, a group that has been street checked at higher rates than their white counterparts. By doing so, we argue that current debates about police street checks in Halifax must attend to the emotional stakes of police-initiated encounters in order to fully appreciate the lived experience of street checks for Black civilians.

In 1887, Canada was in a fervour over so-called “combines,” a term used to cover price-fixing schemes, pool agreements, trusts, and other cartel arrangements. The public debate led to the passage in 1889 of the Anti-Combines Act, the world’s first modern competition statute, enacted a year prior to the United States’ Sherman Antitrust Act. But while Canada acted before its neighbour to the south, the United States was omnipresent in the Canadian debates in four ways: as a benchmark against which the Canadian economy and the combines problem should be judged; as a model for potential legal action; as a potential economic liberator; and as the very source and propagator of the combines problem. Canadians thus alternately presented the United States as saviour or devil, as paragon or antithesis. The result was a paradox of a sort: Canadians borrowed American ideas in order to avoid becoming American.

This article employs a “policy cycle” framework to explore Bill C-51, legislation which contains Canada’s latest amendments to the “rape shield.” Through an in-depth evaluation of earlier rape shield reforms, as well as a content analysis of the legislative proceedings of Bill C-51, this paper reveals that, while the impetus for introducing rape shield legislation is to protect the equality and privacy rights of sexual assault complainants, the legislative process of these “policy cycles” focuses disproportionately on remedying due process concerns and less on the problems that arise in judicial implementation of the provisions. We situate this finding within the larger trend towards the “judicialization of politics,” and trace some of the institutional and structural obstacles that impede Parliamentarians from more effectively legislating to improve sexual assault trials for complainants.

Community trust in law enforcement and confidence in the administration of justice is put to the ultimate test when police officers act outside the limits prescribed by the criminal law. External and civilian oversight of the police can be essential to investigate and respond to allegations of police criminality and impropriety. However, little is known about the investigations completed by civilian oversight agencies and the prosecution of police officers. In this paper, we analyze 159 investigations by the Ontario Special Investigations Unit over a fifteen-year period. We examine each case from the laying of charges to prosecution through to sentencing. We provide an empirical analysis of how the justice system responds to police officers charged with a criminal offence. We situate these findings within the context of the broader justice system and police oversight. At the same time, we observe certain differences between the Canadian and American approaches to dealing with police offenders accused and convicted of criminal offences.

This article reflects on the question of how culture and religion enter legal cases and public debates about the place of majoritarian religious symbols in diverse societies that have some democratic will to inclusion. In the context of the new diversity, the article considers how the articulation of “our culture and heritage” as a strategy for preserving “formerly” religious symbols and practices in public spaces excludes particular groups from the narrative of who “we” are as a nation. The reader is invited to consider how challenges to such symbols and practices might be articulated as a challenge to privilege and power and that a refusal to acknowledge those power relations puts the reputation of democracy and human rights at risk.

La présence accrue de justiciables non représenté·e·s devant les tribunaux est régulièrement attribuée à un manque de confiance envers le système judiciaire, notamment à l’égard des avocat·e·s. Agir seul·e devant les tribunaux serait donc un choix délibéré. Un sondage réalisé dans la population générale au Québec permet de démontrer au contraire que la grande majorité des citoyen·ne·s redoutent de faire face seul·e·s à la justice et souhaitent avoir accès aux services d’un·e professionnel·le du droit pour les représenter. Il permet aussi d’établir des liens entre certaines composantes de la localisation sociale des répondant·e·s – âge, condition socioéconomique, scolarité et genre – et leur opinion sur le système de justice et la non-représentation. Il faut en conclure que le rapport au droit et à la justice est la conséquence directe de structures sociales dont il faut tenir compte dans la compréhension de la réalité de la non-représentation.

Cet article s’interroge sur les différentes possibilités susceptibles d’éclairer la norme juridique antidiscriminatoire québécoise, soit l’interdiction de discrimination prévue à l’article 10 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne du Québec, par le cadre théorique de l’intersectionnalité. On procédera à un bref survol de la pensée intersectionnelle telle que développée dans les disciplines externes au droit ainsi qu’un portrait de son intégration au droit sont dressés afin de comprendre la pertinence de l’intersectionnalité pour appréhender la « réalité » sociale de la discrimination. Quelques points d’ancrage de la mobilisation de l’intersectionnalité seront présentés dans une perspective de réinvestissement du droit vers une appréhension élargie de cette « réalité » sociale par la norme juridique. Il est ainsi proposé de repenser les catégorisations juridiques et de déconstruire les dynamiques d’oppression en ouvrant des possibilités de mobilisation concrètes au moment de l’énonciation et de l’interprétation par la pratique judiciaire des éléments constitutifs de l’acte discriminatoire.

This paper explores the thorny mingling of law with qualitative social science methodologies through the lens of the 2010–11 Supreme Court of British Columbia Charter Reference on polygamy, which was conducted to determine whether the criminalization of polygamy was consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Reference reveals how the marginalization of qualitative research(ers) effectively controlled whose voices were to be heard and whose were to be silenced in the broader project of sovereign intervention into family formation. With specific focus on Professor Angela Campbell, who provided expert opinion testimony in the Reference, this paper reflects on two important questions: when social science is invoked in legal settings, whose knowledge is legitimized, and who benefits from this legitimization? Drawing upon the longstanding feminist project of deconstructing assumptions of value-neutrality in all science, this paper considers how qualitative, feminist research(ers) may be inherently at odds with law’s quest for (rational) “truth.”

The collaborative involvement of legal and healthcare professionals is often crucial when managing the consequences of the difficult experiences of those seeking asylum and the impact of these on the construction of the asylum application itself. While such collaboration is not always possible, this article focuses on the experiences of lawyers specialized in immigration law, who are often faced with challenges that do not fall strictly within the legal sphere but must be understood in order to support a successful asylum claim. This article examines the different perceptions among these lawyers as to the scope and limits of their role in this context. Some place greater emphasis on the distinction between professions and the limits of each person’s role. Others appear to express a more nuanced perspective, proposing specific strategies to better manage certain aspects related to mental health in particular.

Sous son aspect positif, la marge d’appréciation que la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme reconnaît aux États permet à ceux-ci d’enrichir le socle des droits fondamentaux établi par la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme. Elle met en avant la responsabilité de chaque État dans la concrétisation de la Convention. Elle contribue alors au développement de la démocratie qui croît avec le renforcement des droits de l’homme. Sous son aspect négatif, l’invocation de la marge d’appréciation permet à la Cour d’absoudre certains États alors que ceux-ci sapent le socle des droits fondamentaux. Elle s’y sent contrainte pour amadouer les États qui contestent son autorité au nom de leur autonomie. Question de survie donc ou à tout le moins de préservation de son rôle unificateur. Le réalisme politique l’emporte alors sur les exigences démocratiques.

Polyamory means consensual, aspirationally gender-egalitarian, non-monogamous relationships. People who engage in such relationships often seek relationship advice. This article is a critical review of a self-help webcomic and other texts in the light of contract theory. Polyamorous people often use contractual concepts to understand their relationships and how to carry them out. Applying critical contract theory, we can trace how problems typical of contractual framing in other fields play out in the poly context. At the same time, these problems are recognized and responded to by poly people, and they dynamically reinterpret core contract concepts. This article thus makes two contributions. First, it provides a study in the way legal concepts percolate out into, and are transformed by, everyday life. Second, in consolidating some ways poly people have solved old contract problems, it offers conceptual tools for the continuing project of imagining more just ways of relating.

In February 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a decision—Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 SCC 5—that can properly be described as revolutionary. In Nevsun, the court found that a Canadian corporation operating in a host state, Eretria, could be liable under Canadian domestic law for human rights abuses committed in Eritrea under customary international law, as incorporated into Canadian domestic law. The decision merits special attention because it is likely to fundamentally change the relationship between foreign investors, host states and the residents of host states adversely affected by investors’ unlawful conduct which amount to modern slavery.

La politique actuelle de réconciliation qui guide les rapports que l’État canadien entretient avec les peuples autochtones affiche une certaine discontinuité en matière de reconnaissance de leurs droits religieux. D’une part, les gouvernements accordent aux Autochtones certains privilèges à des fins de valorisation de leurs particularismes religieux dans l’espace public, d’une manière qui ne s’étend pas nécessairement à d’autres segments de la société. Parallèlement, par l’entremise de lois et d’ententes politiques, des nations autochtones se sont vu reconnaître des droits et privilèges en lien avec leur sphère religieuse, lesquels demeurent toutefois largement assujettis au cadre normatif établi par la majorité. Enfin, les tribunaux peinent jusqu’à présent à considérer les particularismes religieux des nations autochtones en tant que motif décisionnel. Cette reconnaissance à géométrie variable laisse transparaître un relent de colonialisme suivant lequel la dimension symbolique est valorisée, au détriment des avenues susceptibles de mener à une réelle autonomie des nations autochtones en matière d’expression religieuse.

In 2017, a Muslim cemetery project was proposed in the municipality of St-Apollinaire, just outside Quebec City. This proposal required a change in local zoning, which necessitated approval from citizens living around the targeted plot of land, through the use of diverse deliberative tools. Drawing on a small-scale empirical study conducted in 2017–2018 with key informants in the cemetery project, this article investigates how these actors lived through, engaged with, and operated within the bounds of law. To do this, I suggest employing a legal consciousness framework to examine how local life is also where everyday lived law occurs. The local governance of diversity in death thus requires a re-evaluation of the “local,” identity politics, relationships, and legal consciousness. Ultimately, this article proposes that local decision-making processes play an important yet underexamined role in the broader conversations on belonging.

In 2016, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found that Canada’s management of child welfare discriminates against First Nations children. The First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, one of the complainants, maintains a web-based campaign called “I Am A Witness,” providing details on the hearings and legal materials and asking visitors to act towards ending discrimination against First Nations children. What does it mean to bear witness to such discrimination? The concept of “witnessing” circulates through Indigenous oral traditions, communication and media theories, and the common law. This article explores the I Am A Witness campaign, arguing that as it evokes various theories of witnessing and builds public awareness of legal processes, it shifts spaces of and perspectives on legality beyond Western categories, creating a public that is enabled to bear witness to, and respond to, ongoing injustices against Indigenous peoples.

Religious freedom is protected by section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Historically, the right has been understood in individual terms, though the courts have acknowledged a collective dimension to religion as expressed in a community of believers. Yet, the precise meaning of collective religious freedom has not been fully fleshed out. The current case law only encompasses a limited range of forms of collective religious expression and does not articulate a coherent theory as to why some collective 2(a) claims succeed while others fail. This paper draws on concepts from interpretive sociology to help clarify the existing jurisprudence and reveal a tension that is otherwise invisible over the status of volition/voluntariness in the collective religious freedom framework. Addressing this tension can help rationalize the Court’s jurisprudence and give resources to critics looking to change how the law encompasses collective religious experience.

The notarial profession in Québec is currently facing several challenges, including that of the financial situation of many of its members. A study conducted among notaries in the Outaouais region reveals that although, in general, notaries recognize that there is a price war happening, they do not necessarily agree on its causes, their capacity to address it, or the most effective ways to do so. While the traditional image of the notary as a professional and public official remains prominent, it now competes with another, more entrepreneurial view of the notary as a service provider in a competitive market. This implies that the notarial profession is currently going through a transition period that could involve a shift towards new business models.

In 2019, the province of Quebec and the canton of Geneva passed bills establishing their states as “secular.” While each law is, to a certain extent, context specific, both present noteworthy similarities. First, neutrality (the cornerstone of laïcité) is articulated around two elements: (1) restrictions that affect the religious practices of public servants belonging to minority religions and (2) protections for Christian symbols constructed as “cultural.” The article questions the implications for inclusive citizenship of formalizing regulatory regimes that differentiate between “religion” and “culture.” Second, a comparative lens enables an analysis of how, through whom, and why similar regimes of regulation travel from one area of the world to another. The article argues for the importance of considering transnational influences when analyzing the regulation of religion to better (1) understand why particular models of secularism gain traction and (2) capture power dynamics structuring these processes of traction.