xanawu

so I’ve been meaning to write about the reblaw conference I went to a couple of weeks ago (don’t mind the horrible-looking website), because it gave me fresh inspiration to study law again, and reminded me why I quit my job to come to law school.

about a dozen of us headed down for the conference, which was held over two days at yale in new haven, connecticut. our first notable experience was being held up at the US border by the lovely department of homeland security. as the officer photographed and fingerprinted the spaniard of our group, he urged us to “be careful in new haven, it’s dangerous!”, a warning we would continue to hear when we arrived at the small city. and yes, it’s disconcerting to walk in the pristine new-england campus of yale, when actually 24.4% of people in new haven live below the poverty line. after 6 pm every day a shuttle service brings students straight to the door of their homes, a tribute to the crime arising from the disparity between über-elite university and Rest-of-City.

“Think globally and act locally!” was an oft-cited slogan at the first panel I went to on human rights (ironically human rights in Nigeria was discussed more than anywhere else). the panel was on the critique of international human rights as a failure to actually empower the marginalized in developing countries, a feeling I’ve espoused but been afraid to vocalize (ok, maybe not afraid, but people don’t take me seriously anyway when I say “I don’t believe in human rights”). I continued to find nuggets of inspiration/ideas throughout the day as I participated in panels on standing in environmental litigation, the criminal justice system of new orleans pre & post-Katrina (I can tell you some pretty shocking stats), and civil rights protesting…

all in all, I really needed that weekend to feel normal again. as much as it was called ‘rebellious’, to me it was the type of law we’re supposed to be talking about anyway (I suspect the SPINlaw conference at osgoode is actually more radical, but modest Canadians would spurn the use of such overt rebel language). with a $30 registration fee and homestays with yale law students, there is absolutely no reason why we can’t send a large contingent of mcgillers every year–and maybe design our own such conference in the future as well.

everyone is freaking out at school (I mean, more than usual)–all because we have a factum to prepare for tuesday (the prof called it our ‘valentine’ for her, the humour of which was lost on us). Anyway we get to moot it in a few weeks, which should be fun. And what exactly do I get to research? …

Aujourd’hui, les Hell’s Angels sont présents dans 22 pays, comptent 184 chapitres et 2 000 membres. Au Canada, 30 chapitres et 430 membres répartis dans 7 provinces. Leurs principales sphères d’activités touchent : l’importation, trafic, culture et possession de stupéfiants ainsi que l’industrie du sexe (danseuses, prostitution et agences d’escortes).

Pour devenir membre en règle d’un chapitre des Hell’s Angels, l’individu doit franchir les étapes suivantes :

- Friend
- Hang around
- Prospect
- Membre en règle

Suite à l’obtention de ce dernier statut, le membre en règle devient parrain d’un club école. Il recrute et supervise les activités criminelles des nouveaux venus. Le club école possède sensiblement la même structure qu’un chapitre des Hell’s Angels. Avant de devenir membre en règle, il faut franchir les étapes de “friend”, “hang around”, “striker” et finalement, membre.

there once was a judge named dubé
who liked to roll in black duvets
she came to court wrapped
and mclachlin just laughed
so she cried and ran to laforest

online encyclopaedia Wikipedia has tightened its submission rules following a complaint (BBC)

and the economist’s special report (on Canada!) this week aptly changed the s. 91 POGG to “Peace, Order and Rocky Government”. Which makes me think, damn, they’re getting good journalists to dig *that* one out — I’m not even sure most people here have heard of POGG… (what do you mean you don’t read the Constitution?)

a pretty succinct primer on Canada — and it reminds me of my not-so-distant past in the oill sands of Alberta…

In the constitutional arrangements passed on to us by the British and recognized by the preamble to the Constitution Act, 1867, the provincial superior courts are the foundation of the rule of law itself. Governance by rule of law requires a judicial system that can ensure its orders are enforced and its process respected. In Canada, the provincial superior court is the only court of general jurisdiction and as such is the centre of the judicial system. None of our statutory courts has the same core jurisdiction as the superior court and therefore none is as crucial to the rule of law. To remove the power to punish contempt ex facie by youths would maim the institution which is at the heart of our judicial system. Destroying part of the core jurisdiction would be tantamount to abolishing the superior courts of general jurisdiction, which is impermissible without constitutional amendment.

–MacMillan Bloedel Ltd. v. Simpson, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 725 at para. 37.