BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights - ECPv6.15.20//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://aspercentre.ca
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Toronto
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20080309T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20081102T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20090308T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20091101T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20100314T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20101107T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20110313T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20111106T060000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20120311T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20121104T060000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20090421T043000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20090421T180000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T155602Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T162254Z
UID:987-1240288200-1240336800@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Parliamentary Democracy Book Launch
DESCRIPTION:PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY IN CRISIS: The Dilemmas\, Choices and Future of Parliamentary Government in Canada\nEdited by Lorne Sossin and Peter Russell\, published by University of Toronto Press \nFaculty of Law\, Flavelle House\, Rowell Room \nOur distinguished panelists discussed the future of Canada’s democracy: lessons learned and where to we go from here. This is the third in our series on the topic and celebrated the book that came out of our December 5th event on the Governor General’s decision to prorogue Parliament. The discussion was followed by a wine and cheese reception to celebrate the publication and the accomplishments of the Asper Centre in its first year. Our panelists included: \nPeter Hogg is the Scholar in Residence of the law firm Blake Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes). He is professor emeritus at the Osgoode Hall Law School of York University. Peter is the leading constitutional law scholar in Canada. He is the author of the only comprehensive treatise\, namely\, Constitutional Law of Canada. \nMichael Valpy is an award-winning Canadian journalist and author. He writes for the Globe and Mail newspaper where he made his reputation on both political and human interest stories. Through a long career at the Globe\, he has been a reporter\, Ottawa-based national political columnist\, member of the editorial board\, deputy managing editor\, Africa-based correspondent during the last years of apartheid\, and religious affairs columnist. \nDavid Cameron is a Professor of Political Science at U of T\, and is renowned for his significant career in public service at both federal and provincial levels of government. Professor Cameron’s interests include Canadian government and politics\, questions of federalism and Quebec nationalism\, ethnocultural relations\, and the politics and constitution-making of emerging federal countries such as Sri Lanka and Iraq. \nBarbara Cameron is an Associate Professor of Political Science at York University where she teaches courses on public policy and Canadian government at the graduate and undergraduate levels. Her current research focuses on the challenges of democratic accountability in the context of Canada’s system of federalism and the growing power of the executive branch of government. In addition to her academic publications\, she works with non-governmental organizations on public policy issues\, including the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada. \nSujit Choudhry (moderator) holds the Scholl Chair and is Associate Dean (First Year Program) at the U of T. He is cross-appointed to the Department of Political Science\, the School of Public Policy and Governance\, and the Department of Health Management\, Policy and Evaluation. He is a Senior Fellow of Massey College\, and a Member of the University of Toronto Centre for Ethics and Joint Centre for Bioethics. \nWith an introduction and concluding remarks from the editors: \nLorne Sossin is a Professor at the U of T’s Faculty of Law. His teaching interests span administrative law\, public administration\, professional regulation\, civil litigation\, ethics and professionalism\, and legal process. He was the recipient of the Mewett Teaching Award in 2003 and 2004. \nPeter Russell is a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Toronto. He has published widely in academic journals and intervened in many instances of constitutional crisis and development. He is the author of several books on the constitution\, democracy and the judiciary\, including Two Cheers for Minority Government: The Evolution of Canadian Parliamentary Democracy. \n  \n(2009)
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/parliamentary-democracy-book-launch/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20090615
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20090616
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T155433Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T155433Z
UID:985-1245024000-1245110399@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Clinical Course Deadline
DESCRIPTION:Monday\, June 15\, 2009\, at 4:00 PM \nDeadline for upper year students to submit their application for the fall 2009 term of the Asper Centre Clinical Legal Education Course.
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/clinical-course-deadline/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20090622T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20090622T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T155353Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T155353Z
UID:983-1245673800-1245679200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Student Working Groups Information Session
DESCRIPTION:U. of T. law students are invited to attend an information session on the various working groups of the Asper Centre. Volunteers are needed to participate in the following groups over the course of the school year:\n• Emerging Constitutional Issues\n• The Charter and Canadian Citizens Abroad\n• The Internet Surveillance Working Group\n• Legal Aid Boycott \n(Pizza lunch will be provided.) \nEvent date: Tuesday\, September 22\, 2009\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Bennett Lecture Hall
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/student-working-groups-information-session/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20090930T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20090930T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T155300Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20191204T164257Z
UID:981-1254313800-1254319200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Workshop on Exclusion of Evidence Cases
DESCRIPTION:Grant\, Harrison\, Shepherd & Suberu:\nThe Supreme Court Decisions of the Summer of 2009\nWatch the Webcast \nOn July 17\, 2009\, the Supreme Court of Canada handed down its long awaited decisions in R. v. Grant\, R. v. Harrison\, R. v. Shepherd and R. v. Suberu clarifying the law in respect of the exclusion of evidence under s.24(2) of the Charter. Their decisions have been described as an appropriate balancing between liberty interests and the administration of justice\, a clear message to police of the constitutional limits placed on their powers\, and an imaginative redrafting of the Stillman test\, but with an impact that might be hard to predict. Join our distinguished panel who will summarize\, debate and discuss the ramifications of the decisions from many perspectives. \nProfessor Hamish Stewart is an Associate Professor of Law at the University of Toronto\, where he has taught criminal law\, evidence\, and several other subjects since 1993. Before attending law school\, he studied economics\, receiving his B.A. from the University of Toronto in 1983 and his Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1989\, and he taught for a year in the economics department at Williams College in Massachusetts. He received his LL.B. degree from the University of Toronto in 1992\, clerked at the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1992-93\, and was called to the Ontario Bar in 1998. From 1998 to 2007\, he was an Associate Editor of the Canadian Criminal Cases and the Dominion Law Reports. Professor Stewart is the principal author of Sexual Offences in Canadian Law (Canada Law Book\, 2004)\, the General Editor of Evidence: A Canadian Casebook\, 2d ed. (Emond Montgomery\, 2006)\, and the author of more than 40 scholarly papers in criminal law\, evidence\, legal theory\, and economics. \nProfessor Martha Shaffer joined the Faculty of Law in 1990\, and is now an associate professor. She holds law degrees from Harvard and Toronto\, as well as an undergraduate degree from Harvard. She served as Law Clerk to the Supreme Court of Canada for Chief Justice Brian Dickson\, before becoming the Boulton Junior Fellow at the Faculty of Law\, McGill University. Professor Shaffer’s principal research and teaching interests concentrate on criminal law\, family law and equality issues. \nJonathan Dawe was counsel for the Appellant in R. v. Grant and the Civil Liberties Association in R. v. Harrison. B.Sc.(Hons.)\, McGill University (1987); LL.B.\, University of Toronto (1994); LL.M.\, Yale Law School (1996). Called to the Ontario Bar\, 1997\, Partner with Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP (Toronto). Clerked for the Rt. Hon. Antonio Lamer\, C.J.C. (1994-95). Associate Commission Counsel to the Driskell Inquiry (Manitoba; 2006-07). Practices in the area of criminal and constitutional law\, with a special emphasis on criminal appeals. Teaches Criminal Procedure (1999-2004; 2010-) and Advanced Criminal Procedure and Charter Issues (2009-) at the Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto. \nRick Visca was counsel for the Respondent in R. v. Harrison. He graduated from University of Toronto with a degree in Political Science . Studied law at the University of Victoria\, and received LLB in 1992. Articles at Holden Day Wilson. Began as a prosecutor with the Department of Justice in 1994. Prosecuted drug\, tax\, misleading advertising\, and other miscellaneous federal legislation offences. Maintains a trial and appellate practice with the now Public Prosecution Service of Canada. \nEvent date: Wednesday\, September 30\, 2009\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Bennett Lecture Hall\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/workshop-on-exclusion-of-evidence-cases/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20091105T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20091105T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T155122Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T155122Z
UID:979-1257424200-1257429600@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Workshop: Human Rights at the UK Supreme Court
DESCRIPTION:David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights\nand the International Human Rights Program\nPresent \nMichael Fordham\, QC\nHuman Rights at the UK Supreme Court\n  \nA light lunch will be served. \nMichael Fordham QC is a leading public law and human rights barrister in London (www.blackstonechambers.com). His awards have included Human Rights Lawyer of the Year 2005\, the Bar Pro Bono Award 2006\, and Human Rights and Public Law QC of the Year 2008. Mike has appeared in more than 30 cases in the UK’s Supreme Court (formerly known as the House of Lords)\, including many interventions for non-governmental organizations\, beginning with Amnesty International in the Pinochet cases (Pinochet [2000] 1 AC 61; and Pinochet (No.3) [2000] 1 AC 147). Mike led the interventions for JUSTICE in the anti-terrorism control orders cases (MB v SSHD [2007] UKHL 46; JJ v SSHD [2007] UKHL 45; AF v SSHD [2009] UKHL 28) and in the asset-freezing case (A v HM Treasury\, pending: the first appeal argued in the new Supreme Court). Mike has also led the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)’s interventions in Fornah v SSHD [2006] UKHL 46 (gender-based persecution) and R v Asfaw [2008] UKHL 31 (refugee penalisation); the intervention by Liberty in YL v Birmingham CC [2007] UKHL 27 (human rights in private care homes); as well as pending interventions for UNHCR (asylum and sexual-orientation) and Bail for Immigration Detainees (immigration detention due process). Mike is author of the Judicial Review Handbook (5th ed.\, 2008)\, co-editor of the quarterly journal Judicial Review (since 1996) and College Lecturer in Administrative Law at Hertford College\, Oxford. \nMichael Fordham will be talking about recent trends in human rights cases before the UK Supreme Court. \nPlease RSVP to Nadia Gulezko at n.gulezko@utoronto.ca \nEvent date: Thursday\, November 05\, 2009\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Solarium\, Falconer Hall\, Faculty of Law
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/workshop-human-rights-at-the-uk-supreme-court/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20091113T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20091113T130000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T154537Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T154537Z
UID:970-1258102800-1258117200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Prime Minister of Canada et al. v. Omar Khadr
DESCRIPTION:Students and Faculty are welcome to come and watch the live webcast of the argument at the Supreme Court of Canada in Prime Minister of Canada\, et al. v. Omar Khadr. The Asper Centre and the International Human Rights Program (IHRP) have been granted standing in the case as interveners with Human Rights Watch. Professor Audrey Macklin will be our co-counsel with John Norris and Brydie Bethel. Professor Sujit Choudhry is acting as counsel for the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association. Directors Cheryl Milne and Diana Juricevic will be on hand to answer questions about the case. \nCoffee and muffins will be served. \n  \nEvent date: Friday\, November 13\, 2009\, from 9:00 AM to 1:00 PM\nLocation: Rm FLB\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/prime-minister-of-canada-et-al-v-omar-khadr/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20091124T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20091124T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T154443Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T154443Z
UID:967-1259065800-1259071200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Workshop: The Charter Rights of Canadian Citizens Abroad
DESCRIPTION:What duties does the Canadian government owe to Canadian citizens when they are outside of the country? Is there such a thing as a legal duty to protect citizens from harm\, or seek their repatriation when they have suffered harm? What are the rules\, post Hape and Khadr\, governing the extraterritorial application of the Charter\, as well as the impact of international law on those rules? What are the implications of anti-terrorist measures that involve information sharing with governments that may engage in coercive practices on Canadian citizens abroad? This distinguished panel of practitioners and academics will address these complex issues and more. \nPaul Champ is the founding partner of Ottawa law firm Champ & Associates. He is a litigation lawyer with a focus on human rights\, employment\, labour\, and public interest law\, and has developed a practice in national security law. Paul regularly acts as counsel to organizations such as Amnesty International and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association\, and his firm is a partner with the International Justice Network. Paul has defended the human rights of detainees in the custody of the Canadian military in Afghanistan\, was involved in the Iacobucci Inquiry\, and appeared before the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada v. Khadr. He was co-counsel in Abdelrazik v. Minister of Foreign Affairs. \nProf. Audrey Macklin is a professor at the Faculty of Law. She holds law degrees from Yale and Toronto\, and a bachelor of science degree from Alberta. She served as law clerk to Mme Justice Bertha Wilson at the Supreme Court of Canada. Prof. Macklin’s teaching areas include criminal law\, administrative law\, and immigration & refugee law. Her research and writing interests include transnational migration\, citizenship\, forced migration\, feminist and cultural analysis\, and human rights. She has published on these subjects in numerous journals and in collections of essays such as The Security of Freedom: Essays on Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Bill and Engendering Forced Migration. Prof. Macklin has been active in the Omar Khadr case and most recently acted as co-counsel for the Asper Centre in Prime Minister of Canada et al. v. Omar Khadr at the Supreme Court. \nProf. Ed Morgan is a professor at the Faculty of Law where he teaches in the fields of international law and constitutional law. He has a B.A. from Northwestern University\, an LL.B. from the University of Toronto and an LL.M. from Harvard Law School. He has written numerous law journal articles\, case comments\, and book chapters dealing with international and constitutional law issues. He is a regular contributor to national newspapers on issues of international and constitutional law. Professor Morgan has appeared at all levels of Canadian courts as well as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Decolonization Committee of the United Nations\, and has provided expert evidence on international law to numerous U.S. federal and state courts in jurisdictional disputes and conflict of laws cases. He has represented numerous public interest groups in constitutional\, and public interest appeals\, and has argued sovereign immunity cases in the Ontario courts\, the U.S. federal courts\, and the Supreme Court of Canada on behalf of and in challenges to a number of national governments. \nLorne Waldman\, LL.B.\, LL.M.\, graduated from Osgoode Hall Law School in 1977. He was called to the bar in 1979 and since then he has been practicing exclusively in the area of immigration and refugee law. Mr. Waldman has appeared very frequently at all levels of courts in Canada\, including the Federal Court where he has argued many of the leading cases in immigration and refugee law. He was counsel for the Senate of the Republic of Italy when it intervened before the Supreme Court in Burns and Rafay and was one of the senior counsels representing Maher Arar at the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar. He recently represented the Canadian Bar Association in The Prime Minister of Canada et al v. Omar Khadr. \nA light lunch will be served. \nEvent date: Tuesday\, November 24\, 2009\, from 12:30 AM to 2:00 AM\nLocation: Room FLB\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/workshop-the-charter-rights-of-canadian-citizens-abroad/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20100115T150000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20100115T160000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T154257Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20200616T200108Z
UID:965-1263567600-1263571200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Albie Sachs: The Strange Alchemy of Life and Law
DESCRIPTION:Albie Sachs: The Strange Alchemy of Life and Law\n(Oxford University Press\, 2009) \nFriday\, January 15\, 2010 \n3:00 – 4:00 (to be followed by a reception) \nFaculty of Law\, Flavelle House\, Room FLB \n  \nShould a judge be an instrument of pure\, detached reason\, or a person imbued with human empathy? Albie Sachs\, appointed by Nelson Mandela to South Africa’s first Constitutional Court\, which has heard landmark cases dealing with terrorism and torture\, social and economic rights\, the truth commission\, and same sex marriages\, argues that reason and passion are inextricably linked in the judicial function. The talk offers a unique insight into the judicial philosophy of one of the world’s most prominent constitutional judges\, recounted in Sachs’ recent book The Strange Alchemy of Life and Law (OUP\, 2009). \nRead more about Albie Sachs \nTo be followed by a reception and book signing in the Rowell Room\, Flavelle House.
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/albie-sachs-the-strange-alchemy-of-life-and-law/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20100209T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20100209T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T182054Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T161539Z
UID:1037-1265718600-1265724000@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Intellectual Influences on Australian Federalism
DESCRIPTION:Nicholas Aroney – TC Beirne School of Law\, U. of Queensland\nThis paper utilizes the Australian experience of federation\, 1890–1901\, as a vehicle for the discussion of the leading conceptions of federalism extant in the late nineteenth-century English-speaking world. In particular\, the paper examines the federal theories of James Madison\, James Bryce\, Edward Freeman\, Albert Dicey and John Burgess in the context of many others\, and seeks to show that the idea of a ‘Commonwealth of commonwealths’\, although controverted by contending theories\, remained a central theme in late nineteenth-century conceptions of federalism. \nNicholas Aroney teaches constitutional law\, comparative constitutional law and legal theory. He has published widely in these fields\, including recent publications in University of Toronto Law Journal\, The American Journal of Comparative Law\, Law and Philosophy\, Sydney Law Review and Melbourne University Law Review. He also speaks frequently at national and international conferences on these topics. Dr Aroney is the author of several books\, including Freedom of Speech in the Constitution and The Constitution of a Federal Commonwealth: The Making and Meaning of the Australian Constitution\, recently published by Cambridge University Press. He also recently edited a book entitled Restraining Elective Dictatorship: The Upper House Solution? published by University of Western Australia Press. He is currently working on three further books\, The Jurisprudence of a Federal Commonwealth (Cambridge University Press)\, Shari’a in the West? (Oxford University Press) and Constitutional Federalism: Theory and Practice (Ashgate Press). Dr. Aroney came to the Law School in 1995 after working with a major national law firm and acting as a legal consultant in the field of building and construction law. \nA light lunch will be provided. \nFeb 9\, 2010
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/intellectual-influences-on-australian-federalism/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20100211T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20100211T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T153832Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T153832Z
UID:961-1265891400-1265896800@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:The Khadr Decision: A Just Result?
DESCRIPTION:The Supreme Court of Canada released its unanimous decision in Prime Minister of Canada et al. v. Omar Khadr on Friday\, January 29\, 2010. It declared that the Canadian government is violating Omar Khadr’s right to life\, liberty and security under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court denounced the use of torture in the form of sleep deprivation by U.S. authorities against Mr. Khadr when he was 15 years old in order to soften him up for interrogations conducted by Canadian authorities. However\, it stopped short of ordering what was being sought – the request by the Canadian government to release him from Guantanamo and return him to Canada – citing Crown prerogative in regard to foreign relations. What are the implications of this decision? What is the appropriate role for the judiciary in the circumstances of this case? Is a declaration of injustice a just remedy? What difference does it make that Omar Khadr was a child at the time of the initial violations and the allegations against him? \nOur Panel: \nProf. Audrey Macklin is a professor at the Faculty of Law. She holds law degrees from Yale and Toronto\, and a bachelor of science degree from Alberta. She served as law clerk to Mme Justice Bertha Wilson at the Supreme Court of Canada. Prof. Macklin’s teaching areas include criminal law\, administrative law\, and immigration & refugee law. Her research and writing interests include transnational migration\, citizenship\, forced migration\, feminist and cultural analysis\, and human rights. She has published on these subjects in numerous journals and in collections of essays such as The Security of Freedom: Essays on Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Bill and Engendering Forced Migration. Prof. Macklin has been active in the Omar Khadr case and most recently acted as co-counsel for the Asper Centre in Prime Minister of Canada et al. v. Omar Khadr at the Supreme Court. \nProf. Kent Roach is Prichard-Wilson Chair of Law and Public Policy at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law\, with cross-appointments in criminology and political science\, and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. He is a graduate of the University of Toronto and of Yale\, and a former law clerk to Justice Bertha Wilson of the Supreme Court of Canada. Professor Roach’s books include Constitutional Remedies in Canada (winner of the 1997 Owen Prize for best law book)\, Due Process and Victims’ Rights: The New Law and Politics of Criminal Justice (short-listed for the 1999 Donner Prize for best public policy book)\, The Supreme Court on Trial: Judicial Activism or Democratic Dialogue (short-listed for the 2001 Donner Prize)\, and September 11: Consequences for Canada (named one of the five most significant books of 2003 by the Literary Review of Canada). In recent years\, Professor Roach has specialized in anti-terrorism law and policy and is the co-editor of The Security of Freedom: Essays on Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Bill (2001) and Global Anti-Terrorism Law and Policy (2005). Professor Roach also served on the research advisory committee for the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar and is Director of Research (Legal Studies) for the Commission of Inquiry into the Investigation of the Bombing of Air India Flight 182. \nProf. David Schneiderman is Professor of Law and Political Science. He was called to the Bar of British Columbia in 1984 where he practised law and then served as Research Director of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association in Toronto from 1986-89. He was Executive Director of the Centre for Constitutional Studies\, an interdisciplinary research institute\, at the University of Alberta from 1989-99. Professor Schneiderman has authored numerous articles on Canadian federalism\, the Charter of Rights\, Canadian constitutional history\, and constitutionalism and globalization. He has authored Constitutionalizing Economic Globalization: Investment Rules and Democracy’s Promise (Cambridge University Press\, 2008) and co-authored The Last Word: Media Coverage of the Supreme Court of Canada with Florian Sauvageau and David Taras (UBC Press\, 2006). He is founding editor of the quarterly Constitutional Forum Constitutionnel and founding editor-in-chief of the journal Review of Constitutional Studies. \nCheryl Milne is the executive director of the Asper Centre. She has extensive experience as a legal advocate for children previously with the legal clinic Justice for Children and Youth. There she led the clinic’s Charter litigation at the Supreme Court of Canada including the challenge to the corporal punishment defence in the Criminal Code [Canadian Foundation for Children\, Youth and the Law v. Canada (2004)]\, the striking down of the reverse onus sections of the Youth Criminal Justice Act for adult sentencing [R. v. D.B. (2008)]\, and most recently an intervention involving the right of a capable adolescent to consent to her own medical treatment (A.C. v. Manitoba Child and Family Services (2009)]. She is currently the Chair of the Ontario Bar Association’s Constitutional\, Civil Liberties and Human Rights section. \nThe workshop will be moderated by Prof. Hamish Stewart. \n  \nEvent date: Thursday\, February 11\, 2010\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Rm FLB\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto \nLink to the webcast here.
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/the-khadr-decision-a-just-result/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20100225T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20100225T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T153703Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T153703Z
UID:959-1267101000-1267106400@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Overdue Update or Big Brother? Lawful Access and Cyber Surveillance
DESCRIPTION:As rapidly advancing communication technology transforms so many aspects of human interaction it is crucial for public safety that investigative powers remain relevant to the rapidly evolving methods of crime. However\, these methods must not too broadly infringe on the rights and liberties of Canadian Citizens. In 2009\, two bills\, C- 46 and C-47\, were introduced with the intent of updating the state’s authority to access electronic communications data. These bills have been controversial\, provoking very different responses from the law enforcement and privacy communities. \nThe David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association are co-hosting a workshop to explore the important issues associated with giving law enforcement easier access to electronic communications data. Topics will include: the emerging realities of internet privacy\, informational privacy\, and defence and crown perspectives on proposed “lawful access” legislation.\nSpeakers will include: \nProf. David Murakami Wood is a Canada Research Chair in Surveillance Studies and Associate Professor at Queen’s University. He is a member of Queen’s new Surveillance Studies Centre and Managing Editor of Surveillance & Society\, the international journal of surveillance studies. In 2006 he coordinated the influential Report on the Surveillance Society for the UK Information Commissioner (ICO) and organised submissions to the UK House of Commons and House of Lords inquiries on surveillance. Professor Murakami Wood’s research and teaching interests include surveillance and globalization\, new technologies of surveillance\, and the history\, politics and ethics of surveillance. He is currently writing several books and has published numerous articles on surveillance-related issues. \nProf. Lisa Austin is an associate professor at the Faculty of Law\, where she is affiliated with the Centre for Innovation Law and Policy. Prior to joining the faculty\, she served as law clerk to Mr. Justice Frank Iacobucci of the Supreme Court of Canada. Professor Austin’s research and teaching interests include property\, privacy\, the legal regulation of information and the ethical and social justice issues raised by emerging technologies. She is currently developing work on issues such as the challenges that information technology poses to our conception of privacy\, and what theory of law is most responsive to the needs of a technological society. \nRobert Hubbard was called to the Ontario Bar in 1977. He is counsel with the Crown Law Office – Criminal of the Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario. Previously\, Bob was Senior General Counsel with the Department of Justice in Toronto. He has appeared as counsel at all levels of court. Most recently\, Bob was involved in the prosecution of Livent principals Garth Drabinsky and Myron Gottlieb. He has appeared as counsel on many search and seizure/privacy cases at the Supreme Court. Bob has co-authored the books Wiretapping and Other Electronic Surveillance: Law and Practice\, 2000\, Aurora\, Canada Law Book\, The Law of Privilege in Canada\, 2006\, Aurora\, Canada Law Book and Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime\, 2004\, Toronto\, Irwin Law. Bob has also published several articles dealing with privacy issues including: Hubbard\, R.W.\, DeFreitas\, P. and Magotiaux\, S. “The Internet — Expectations of Privacy in a New Context” [2001] 45 Criminal Law Quarterly 170-197; Hubbard\, R.W.\, Magotiaux\, S.\, and Proestos\, X.\, “The Limits of Privacy: Police Access to Subscriber Information in Canada\,” [2002] 46 Criminal Law Quarterly 361- 390. He lectures extensively on criminal law and advocacy related issues. \nAdam Boni is a criminal defence lawyer. He began his career as a federal prosecutor with the Department of Justice. In 1999\, he left the federal prosecution service to start his own boutique criminal defence practice in downtown Toronto. During the past decade\, Mr. Boni has litigated a number of large criminal cases\, at trial and on appeal\, involving complex Charter of Rights issues. He has a keen interest in search and seizure litigation involving electronic surveillance. Mr. Boni is a past Director of the Ontario Criminal Lawyers’ Association (2007-2009). He is a co-author of Sentencing Drug Offenders (Canada Law Book\, 2004) and has written extensive papers on warrantless search issues and roadside drug investigations for the Advocates’ Society. Mr. Boni has been a regular guest speaker at a number of Continuing Legal Education programs offered by the Advocates’ Society and the Criminal Lawyers’ Association on Charter of Rights’ issues. He has been a guest lecturer at training programs and legal educational conferences held for Canada Border Services Agents\, Peel Regional Police\, the Toronto Police Service\, the Ontario Provincial Police and the York Regional Police Service. \nThis panel discussion will be moderated by Graeme Norton\, Director of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association’s Public Safety Project. \nEvent date: Thursday\, February 25\, 2010\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Room FLB\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto \nCLICK HERE FOR LINK TO WEBCAST
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/overdue-update-or-big-brother-lawful-access-and-cyber-surveillance/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20100302T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20100302T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T181755Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T161806Z
UID:1035-1267533000-1267538400@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Canadian Federalism and Treaty Powers: Organic Constitutionalism at Work
DESCRIPTION:Hugo Cyr – Université du Québec à Montréal\nABSTRACT: With the increased mobility and interdependence brought on by globalisation\, governments can no longer deal effectively with what were traditionally regarded as «domestic issues» unless they cooperate among themselves. International law may once have been a sort of inter-state law concerned mostly with relations between states\, but it now looks increasingly inside state borders and has become\, to a large degree\, a trans-governmental law. While this creates significant challenges even for highly-unified «nation-states»\, the challenges are even greater for federations in which powers have been divided up between the central government and federated states. What roles should central governments and federated states play in creating and implementing this new form of governance? Using the Canadian federation as its starting point\, this case study illustrates a range of factors to be considered in the appropriate distribution of treaty powers within a federation. Professor Cyr also shows how – because it has no specific provisions dealing with the distribution of treaty powers – the Canadian constitution has «organically» developed a tight-knit set of rules and principles responding to these distributional factors. This book is therefore both about the role of federated states in the current world order and an illustration of how organic constitutionalism works. \nPRESENTATION: The presentation will focus on the first part of Chapt. II in which I examine the traditional arguments put forward by the federal government to support its claim that it possesses exclusive and plenary powers to make treaties. In that chapter\, I show how all such arguments are without valid constitutional foundation. I also demonstrate how orthodox constitutional sources and sound policy reasons support a division of treaty-making powers according to the general division of legislative powers \nHugo Cyr [LL.B.\, B.C.L. (McGill)\, LL.M. (Yale)\, LL.D. (U. de Montréal] is Professor of Public Law and Legal Theory at the Université du Québec à Montréal and a member of the Québec Bar. He is a member of the Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire sur la diversité au Québec (CRIDAQ) and Vice President of the Chaire UNESCO d’étude des fondements philosophiques de la justice et de la société démocratique. He has been a Boulton Fellow at McGill University\, a law clerk at the Supreme Court of Canada and a Visiting Researcher at the European Academy of Legal Theory. Professor Cyr has also taught at McGill University and the Université de Montréal. \nA light lunch will be served. \n  \n2010
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/canadian-federalism-and-treaty-powers-organic-constitutionalism-at-work/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20100315T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20100315T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T153512Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T153512Z
UID:957-1268656200-1268661600@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Clinic Information Session
DESCRIPTION:Information session on clinical opportunities \nPlease join all the clinics for a joint information session about for-credit clinical opportunities in second and third year. Presenters will include: Asper Centre\, DLS\, Health Law and Equity Clinic\, and the IHRP. Each clinic will review the type of cases/projects pursued\, admission requirements and application details. \nFor more information\, contact Kara Norrington at kara.norrington@utoronto.ca \n  \nEvent date: Monday\, March 15\, 2010\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: FLA\, Flavelle House
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/clinic-information-session-2/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20100317T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20100317T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T153425Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T153425Z
UID:955-1268829000-1268834400@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Constitutional Roundtable - Marci Hamilton
DESCRIPTION:Marci Hamilton – Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law\nThe Rules Against Scandal and What They Mean For the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses\nNOTE: Room change to FLA in Flavelle House. \nMARCI A. HAMILTON is one of the United States’ leading church/state scholars and holds the Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law\, Yeshiva University. She is the author of JUSTICE DENIED: WHAT AMERICA MUST DO TO PROTECT ITS CHILDREN (Cambridge University Press 2008) and GOD VS. THE GAVEL: RELIGION AND THE RULE OF LAW (Cambridge University Press 2005\, 2007). She is also a columnist on constitutional issues for www.findlaw.com\, where her column appears every other Thursday. She has been a visiting professor at Princeton University\, New York University School of Law\, Emory University School of Law\, and the Princeton Theological Seminary. \nProfessor Hamilton is frequently asked to advise Congress and state legislatures on the constitutionality of pending legislation and to consult in cases involving important constitutional issues. She was lead counsel for the City of Boerne\, Texas\, in Boerne v. Flores\, 521 U.S. 507 (1997)\, before the Supreme Court in its seminal federalism and church/state case holding the Religious Freedom Restoration Act unconstitutional. She has served as constitutional law counsel in many important clergy sex abuse and religious land use cases\, and has testified before numerous state legislatures regarding elimination of the statutes of limitations for childhood sex abuse. \nProfessor Hamilton clerked for Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor of the United States Supreme Court and Judge Edward R. Becker of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. She received her J.D.\, magna cum laude\, from the University of Pennsylvania Law School where she served as Editor-in-Chief of the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. She also received her M.A. in Philosophy and M.A.\, high honors\, in English from Pennsylvania State University\, and her B.A.\, summa cum laude\, from Vanderbilt University. She is a member of Phi Beta Kappa and Order of the Coif. \nA light lunch will be provided. \nFor more workshop information\, please contact Professor Lorraine Weinrib at l.weinrib@utoronto.ca or Nadia Gulezko at n.gulezko@utoronto.ca \n  \nEvent date: Wednesday\, March 17\, 2010\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Room FLA\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto \n 
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/constitutional-roundtable-marci-hamilton/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20100323T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20100323T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T153312Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T161744Z
UID:953-1269347400-1269352800@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Criminalization of Polygamy: Constitutional or Not?
DESCRIPTION:Join us for a panel discussion on the upcoming reference at the British Columbia Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of s. 293 of the Criminal Code which prohibits polygamy in Canada. This case has attracted wide interest\, and will involve various interveners\, including the Asper Centre together with the Canadian Coalition for Children and Youth\, and other religious\, women’s and children’s\, and civil liberties organizations. Cheryl Milne\, Director of the Asper Centre\, will moderate a panel including faculty members Lorraine Weinrib\, Rebecca Cook\, and Mohammad Fadel. Professor Weinrib\, who has published widely in the area of the Charter and teaches several courses in constitutional law\, will address the issue of freedom of religion with respect to polygamy\, particularly the treatment of children and vulnerable persons by religious institutions\, and more specifically the questions of religious framing of the family with reference to polygamous communities. Professor Fadel\, who teaches Religion and the Liberal State: The Case of Islam and has published numerous articles in Islamic legal history\, will discuss polygamy under Islamic law and associated issues freedom of religion. Finally\, Professor Cook\, Faculty Chair in International Human Rights and Co-Director of the International Programme on Reproductive and Sexual Health Law at the University of Toronto\, will address Canada’s obligations under international law with respect to polygamy. \nA light lunch will be served. \n  \nMarch 23\, 2010
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/criminalization-of-polygamy-constitutional-or-not/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20100614
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20100615
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T153230Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T153230Z
UID:951-1276473600-1276559999@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Clinical Course Deadline 2010
DESCRIPTION:Monday\, June 14\, 2010\, at 4:00 PM \nDeadline for upper year students to submit their application for the fall 2010 term of the Asper Centre Clinical Legal Education Course.
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/clinical-course-deadline-2010/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20100924
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20100926
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T153107Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T153107Z
UID:948-1285286400-1285459199@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Who Belongs? Rights\, Benefits\, Obligations and Immigration Status
DESCRIPTION:The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights is co-sponsor\, with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association\, of a two day conference at the Faculty of Law on September 24th and 25th\, 2010. \nThe Canadian Civil Liberties Association is undertaking a research project on the status of immigrant in Canadian society. Immigration status – whether it be citizenship\, permanent resident status\, visitor status\, temporary workers status\, “no status” – plays an important role in how rights\, benefits and obligations are allocated. Rules regarding voting rights\, access to social services\, employment and property ownership often make distinctions on the basis of immigration status. What are the consequences of such distinctions? Are they appropriate? \nThe aim of the project is to explore the consequences of the differential access to rights and benefits on the basis of immigration status. Particularly\, the following questions will be explored: What is the current situation with respect to immigration status distinctions made in different sectors such as voting rights\, employment\, professional affiliations\, membership on boards\, investment rules and access to social services? How has the concept of citizenship evolved through the years and internationally? How does it relate to First Nations’ concepts of citizenship? How should we conceptualize distinctions on the basis of immigration status in light of mobility and equality rights? Is discrimination on the basis of immigration status a proxy for racial discrimination? What is the experience of Human Rights Commissions on this issue? How does the temporary foreign workers program operate within our immigration law framework? Is it compatible with the values that sustain it? What impact do current bilateral treaties on the recognition of education credentials have on the treatment of immigrants in Canada? What should be the government’s position with respect to illegal immigrants‘ access to health\, education or other social services? Should we revisit the restrictions on the right to vote\, on employment rules in civil service\, on participation on management boards? \n 
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/who-belongs-rights-benefits-obligations-and-immigration-status/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101005T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101005T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T180855Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T162144Z
UID:1028-1286281800-1286287200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Is none still too many?
DESCRIPTION:Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto\nConstitutional Roundtable\npresents\nJames Hathaway\, University of Michigan Law School\nAudrey Macklin\, University of Toronto Faculty of Law\nLorne Waldman\, Lorne Waldman and Associates \nIs None Still Too Many? Asylum Seekers on Boats\, Then and Now\, Here and There \n12:30 – 2:00\nTuesday\, October 5\, 2010\nClassroom C – Flavelle House – 78 Queen’s Park \nJames C. Hathaway\, the William Hearn Professor and Dean of the Melbourne Law School\, is a leading authority on international refugee law whose work is regularly cited by the most senior courts of the common law world. He is also Senior Visiting Research Associate at Oxford University’s Refugee Studies Programme\, and President of the Cuenca Colloquium on International Refugee Law. Hathaway was previously the James E. and Sarah A. Degan Professor and founding Director of the Program in Refugee and Asylum Law at the University of Michigan\, USA (1998-2008)\, Professor of Law and Associate Dean of the Osgoode Hall Law School\, Canada (1984-1998)\, Counsel on Special Legal Assistance for the Disadvantaged to the Government of Canada (1983-1984)\, and Professeur adjoint de droit at the Université de Moncton\, Canada (1980-1983). He has been appointed a visiting professor at the Universities of Cairo\, California\, Macerata\, and Tokyo and has provided training on refugee law to academic\, non-governmental\, and official audiences around the world. Hathaway’s publications include more than sixty journal articles\, a leading treatise on the refugee definition (The Law of Refugee Status\, 1991)\, an interdisciplinary study of models for refugee law reform (Reconceiving International Refugee Law\, 1997) and\, most recently\, The Rights of Refugees under International Law (2005) – the first comprehensive analysis of the human rights of refugees set by the UN Refugee Convention\, all linked to key international human rights norms and applied to the world’s most difficult protection challenges. He serves as Counsel on International Protection to both the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants and Asylum Access\, a non-profit organization committed to delivering innovative legal aid to refugees in the global South. Hathaway also sits on the editorial boards of the Journal of Refugee Studies and the Immigration and Nationality Law Reports and directs the Refugee Caselaw Site (www.refugeecaselaw.org)\, a website that collects\, indexes\, and publishes leading judgments on refugee law. \nAudrey Macklin is a professor at the Faculty of Law. She holds law degrees from Yale and Toronto\, and a bachelor of science degree from Alberta. After graduating from Toronto\, she served as law clerk to Mme Justice Bertha Wilson at the Supreme Court of Canada. She was appointed to the faculty of Dalhousie Law School in 1991\, promoted to Associate Professor 1998\, moved to the University of Toronto in 2000\, and became a full professor in 2009. While teaching at Dalhousie\, she also served as a member of the Immigration and Refugee Board. Professor Macklin’s teaching areas include criminal law\, administrative law\, and immigration and refugee law. Her research and writing interests include transnational migration\, citizenship\, forced migration\, feminist and cultural analysis\, and human rights. She has published on these subjects in journals such as Refuge and Canadian Woman Studies\, and in collections of essays such as The Security of Freedom: Essays on Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Bill and Engendering Forced Migration. \nLorne Waldman LL.B. (Osgoode)\, LL.M (Toronto) practices exclusively in the area of immigration and refugee law\, and has done so since 1979. Mr. Waldman has appeared very frequently at all levels of the courts in Canada\, including the Supreme Court of Canada\, the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal where he has argued many of the leading cases in immigration and refugee law. Mr. Waldman successfully acted as co counsel for Maher Arar at the public inquiry into the circumstances behind his deportation from the United States to Syria where he was subjected to brutal torture. The Public Inquiry concluded that there was absolutely no evidence that Mr. Arar was involved in any illegal activities. He acted for the Canadian Bar Association at the recent Supreme Court hearings in the case of Charkaoui where the Supreme Court struck down the Security Certificates. He has also appeared for the CBA as one of the spokesperson on national security issues at hearings into the Review of the Anti Terrorism Legislation and assisted in the writing of the CBA briefs on the Anti Terrorism Legislation to the Parliamentary And Senate Committees. Mr. Waldman has appeared as a witness before the House of Commons and Senate on issues of immigration and refugee law frequently and is a frequent commentator on immigration and refugee issues in the media. He is the author and editor of Immigration Law and Practice\, a two volume\, loose leaf service published by Butterworth’s Canada in 1992\, and two other works: The Definition of Convention Refugee published by Butterworths in 2001 and Canadian Immigration and Refugee Practice\, first published in October of 2005 by Butterworths. It is published annually with updates to case digests and commentary. In August\, 2007 he was awarded the Louis St Laurent award by the CBA for his contribution to the legal profession.
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/is-none-still-too-many/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101006T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101006T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T152940Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T152940Z
UID:946-1286368200-1286373600@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:G20 Workshop
DESCRIPTION:Project G20 Inaugural Panel:\nProtecting Rights in the Aftermath of the G20 Summit in Toronto\nProject G20\, a student-led working group of the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights\, invites the legal community and the public at large to attend its inaugural panel entitled “Protecting Rights in the Aftermath of the G20 Summit in Toronto.”\nOn June 26-27\, 2010 Toronto hosted the summit for the Group of 20 (“G20”) nations. Anticipating the large scale protests that would precede and coincide with the summit\, the Government of Canada\, the Province of Ontario and the City of Toronto coordinated to establish a substantial security infrastructure and perimeter around the summit site. As many started gathering in Toronto prior to the weekend summit\, complaints about improper police conduct became increasingly frequent. On June 26\, as many as 10\,000 people gathered in protest. While the vast majority demonstrated peacefully\, a small group of black-clad individuals broke away from the main crowd\, vandalizing stores and banks in the downtown core and setting fire to abandoned police vehicles. For the remainder of the weekend\, the police adopted aggressive measures to control the demonstrations that subsequently lead to the arrest of more than 1\,000 people\, the largest mass arrest in Canadian history.\nThis inaugural panel will address the many allegations of breaches to Charter rights during the G20 week and add perspective to the debate about the proper balance between society’s fundamental freedoms and the state’s security interests. \nFor more information\, please contact asper.projectg20@gmail.com \nPanel Discussion with: \nCara Zwibel is Director of the Fundamental Freedoms Program at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. She is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School and received her Master’s in Law from New York University where she was an Arthur T. Vanderbilt Scholar. Cara was a judicial clerk to the Honourable Ian Binnie at the Supreme Court of Canada and subsequently worked at a large national law firm practicing in the areas of public law\, health law and commercial litigation. She has co-authored published articles on the rule of law in the Supreme Court of Canada and on Charter advocacy. \nProfessor Kent Roach is Prichard-Wilson Chair of Law and Public Policy at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law\, with cross-appointments in criminology and political science\, and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. He is a graduate of the University of Toronto and of Yale\, and a former law clerk to \nJustice Bertha Wilson of the Supreme Court of Canada. \nIrina Ceric is a staff lawyer at Parkdale Community Legal Services and a PhD candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School. A long-time community activist\, she currently works primarily with the Law Union of Ontario’s Movement Defence Committee and the Global Balkans Network. \nThe panel will be moderated by Professor David Schneiderman. \n  \nEvent date: Wednesday\, October 06\, 2010\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Room FLB\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/g20-workshop/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101012T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101012T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T181142Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T162022Z
UID:1031-1286886600-1286892000@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Acts of Attrition
DESCRIPTION:Mary Eberts\, S.J.D. Candidate\, University of Toronto Faculty of Law \nOctober 12\, 2010
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/acts-of-attrition/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101021T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101021T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T181315Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T161952Z
UID:1033-1287664200-1287669600@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Proportionality
DESCRIPTION:Speaker: Aharon Barak\, President of the Supreme Court of Israel (Emeritus) \nThis essay focuses on proportionality stricto sensu as a consequential test of balancing. The basic balancing rule establishes a general criterion for deciding between the marginal benefit to the public good and the marginal limit to human rights. Based on the Israeli constitutional jurisprudence\, this essay supports the adoption of a principled balancing approach that translates the basic balancing rule into a series of principled balancing tests\, taking into account the importance of the rights and the type of restriction. This approach provides better guidance to the balancer (legislator\, administrator\, judge)\, restricts wide discretion in balancing\, and makes the act of balancing more transparent\, more structured\, and more foreseeable. The advantages of proportionality stricto sensu with its three levels of abstraction are several. It stresses the need to always look for a justification of a limit on human rights; it structures the mind of the balancer; it is transparent; it creates a proper dialog between the political brunches and the judiciary\, and it adds to the objectivity of judicial discretion. Proportionality stricto sensu however has it critics: some claim that it attempts to balance incommensurable items; others that balancing is irrational. The answer to the critics is that it is a common base for comparison\, namely the social marginal importance and that the balancing rules—basic\, principled\, concrete—supply a rational basis for balancing. A democracy must entrust the judiciary—the unelected independent judiciary—to be the final decision-maker—subject to constitutional amendments—about proper ends that cannot be achieved because they are not proportionality stricto sensu. \nAharon Barak\, born in Lithuania in 1936\, is married and the father of four. He studied law\, economics and international relations at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Barak received an MA in law in 1958\, and a doctorate in 1963. He was appointed Associate Professor of Law at the Hebrew University in 1968 and became Dean of that Faculty in 1974. From 1975-8\, he occupied the position of Attorney General of Israel\, an appointed and independent position in the Ministry of Justice overseeing the justice system. He was appointed to the Supreme Court of Israel in 1978 and became its President in 1995. His retirement from the Court took place in September 2006 when he reached the age of mandatory retirement. He has received a number of prizes and honours\, including the Kaplan Prize for excellence in science and research and the Israel Prize in legal sciences as well as numerous honorary degrees. He is the author of a number of books in Hebrew and in English as well as numerous articles on a wide variety of legal topics. His publications in English include Judicial Discretion\, Purposive Interpretation in Law and The Judge in a Democracy\, from Princeton University Press. \nA light lunch will be served. \nFor more workshop information\, please contact Professor Lorraine Weinrib at l.weinrib@utoronto.ca or Nadia Gulezko at n.gulezko@utoronto.ca. \n  \n2010
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/proportionality/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101025T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101025T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T152750Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T152750Z
UID:943-1288009800-1288015200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:The Decriminalization of Prostitution in Ontario: Perspectives on Bedford v. Canada
DESCRIPTION:In the recent landmark case Bedford v. Canada\, Justice Himmel of the Ontario Superior Court held that three provisions of the Criminal Code that criminalize facets of prostitution—living on the avails of prostitution\, keeping a common bawdy house and communicating in a public place for the purpose of engaging in prostitution—infringe the core values protected by section 7 of the Charter\, and that this infringement is not saved by section 1 as a reasonable limit demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. The Federal Government has indicated that it will appeal the decision\, which was stayed for 30 days pending further submissions from the Crown. \nA distinguished panel\, which will include Professor Alan Young (counsel for the applicants in the case)\, Professor Brenda Cossman\, and Professor Hamish Stewart\, will discuss the Superior Court decision and what it means for the future of prostitution laws in Canada. Read an abridged version of the decision here or the complete decision here.  \n  \nEvent date: Monday\, October 25\, 2010\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Room FLC\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/the-decriminalization-of-prostitution-in-ontario-perspectives-on-bedford-v-canada/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101106T083000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101106T170000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T155009Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170721T162108Z
UID:972-1289032200-1289062800@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Symposium: The Role of Interveners in Public Interest Litigation
DESCRIPTION:Friday\, November 6th\, 2010\nSign in and Registration: 8:30 a.m. \nPublic interest litigation can have a significant impact on public policy in Canada. Although Charter and other public interest litigation is most often commenced by individual claimants who are challenging laws that affect them individually\, the test case litigant is often supported or opposed by powerful interveners such as governments and advocacy organizations representing groups in society seeking to be heard on the significant human rights issues of the day. The role that all of these interveners play in court and in the public discourse surrounding these cases is the subject of this one day symposium.\nThe symposium’s outstanding faculty of professionals and academics include leading jurists and representatives of government interveners\, public interest groups and the private bar. International panelists will explore the roles that interveners take in jurisdictions outside of Canada. The symposium will also highlight new research on the impact of interveners at the Supreme Court of Canada conducted by the University of Toronto\, Faculty of Law. \nSpeakers Include: Hon. Justice Dennis O’Connor\, Hon. Frank Iacobucci\, Hon. Justice Stephen Goudge\, Frank Addario\, Nathalie Des Rosiers\, R. Douglas Elliott\, Clive Baldwin\, Michael Fordham\, Q.C\, Paul Collins (author Friends of the Court)\, Michal Fairburn\, among others \nWebcast\nProgram \nConference Papers\nSymposium Participants
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/symposium-the-role-of-interveners-in-public-interest-litigation/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101110T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101110T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T152451Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T152451Z
UID:941-1289392200-1289397600@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Workshop: The Interrogation Trilogy
DESCRIPTION:In three cases released on October 8\, 2010\, the Supreme Court added the third story in what the Court described as the “interrogation trilogy” (R. v. Oickle\, R. v. Singh and R. v. Sinclair). Oickle spoke to the types of techniques that officers can legally use to persuade someone to confess\, including the use of an “infallible” lie detector test. Singh permitted repeated questioning after the accused asserted his right to silence. Now\, Sinclair and the other 2 decisions released together hold that a person’s s.10(b) right to counsel under the Charter does not mean that the accused has the right to have counsel present during police questioning or to consult more than once\, unless there is a sufficient change in circumstances that might warrant additional legal advice. \nPanel Discussion with: \nProfessor Hamish Stewart is an Associate Professor of Law at the U of T\, where he has taught criminal law\, evidence\, and several other subjects since 1993. Before attending law school\, he studied economics\, receiving his B.A. from the University of Toronto in 1983 and his Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1989\, and he taught for a year in the economics department at Williams College in Massachusetts. He received his LL.B. degree from the University of Toronto in 1992\, clerked at the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1992-93\, and was called to the Ontario Bar in 1998. From 1998 to 2007\, he was an Associate Editor of the Canadian Criminal Cases and the Dominion Law Reports. Professor Stewart is the principal author of Sexual Offences in Canadian Law (Canada Law Book\, 2004)\, the General Editor of Evidence: A Canadian Casebook\, 2d ed. (Emond Montgomery\, 2006)\, and the author of more than 40 scholarly papers in criminal law\, evidence\, legal theory\, and economics. \nJohn Norris is a practicing lawyer in Toronto. He received a B.A. (Honours Philosophy) from Carleton University in 1982 and an M.A. (Philosophy) from the University of Western Ontario in 1984. He received his LL.B. from the University of Toronto in 1991 and was called to the Bar of Ontario in 1993. Since then he has maintained a trial and appellate practice in the areas of criminal\, constitutional and national security law. He is an adjunct member of the Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto\, where he has taught Advanced Criminal Law\, Evidence Law\, Advanced Evidence and Legal Ethics\, and of Osgoode Hall Law School\, where he teaches in the part-time LL.M. Program in Criminal Law. He is the author of several scholarly articles\, an Assistant Editor of the Canadian Rights Reporter and a regular contributor to continuing legal education programs. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of Canadian Journalists for Free Expression. In 2008\, he was appointed by the Minister of Justice to the roster of Special Advocates for security certificate proceedings under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. He was counsel for the Criminal Lawyers Association in R. v. Oickle. \nJohn McInnes is a lawyer at the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney-General\, Crown Law Office – Criminal and an Adjunct Professor in the University of Toronto\, Faculty of Law. He received a B.A. from the University of Toronto in 1992 and an LL.B. from the University of British Columbia in 1995. He articled at the Crown Law Office – Criminal in 1995-1996. From 1997 to 2000 he practised as defence counsel. In 2000\, Mr. McInnes returned to the Crown Law Office – Criminal as Crown counsel. He regularly appears at all levels of Court in trial and appellate matters. He is currently a member of both the Justice Prosecutions Group and the Criminal Appeal Group within the Crown Law Office – Criminal. Mr. McInnes has also published several articles on criminal law topics and is a frequent participant in continuing education programs for criminal defence lawyers and Crown counsel. Currently\, Mr. McInnes also teaches the introductory criminal procedure course at the University Faculty of Law. Mr. McInnes was counsel for the AG Ontario in R. v. Sinclair. \nAlexi Wood is an associate at McCarthy Tetrault LLP. She maintains a general litigation practice\, focusing on civil litigation\, including medical malpractice and commercial cases. Her interests also include criminal and constitutional cases. She was the Director of the Public Safety Project at the Canadian Civil Liberties Assocationa. She also interned for the UN’s High Commission for Human Rights in Switzerland\, and later was selected as a delegate in a US State Department mission to Bolivia\, where she gave presentations to the US Embassy\, local officials and the Bolivian Supreme Court on international law and domestic violence. Ms. Wood has hosted and produced a legal issues cable television show as well as published articles and delivered numerous lectures on a wide range of topics\, including balancing civil liberties and human rights\, violence against women\, and international law. Ms. Wood obtained her JD from the University of Cincinnati College of Law\, where she was a Human Rights Fellow. She was called to the Ontario bar in 2007. She acted as co-counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association in R. v. Sinclair. \nThe panel will be moderated by Cheryl Milne\, Executive Director of the Asper Centre. \nA light lunch will be served. \n  \nEvent date: Wednesday\, November 10\, 2010\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Room FLA\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/workshop-the-interrogation-trilogy/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101119T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101119T123000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T152255Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T152255Z
UID:938-1290157200-1290169800@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Symposium on U.N. Security Council Resolution 1267
DESCRIPTION:The Asper Centre with the International Human Rights Program\nand Canadian Civil Liberties Association\npresent \nSymposium on the Impact of Targeted Anti-terrorist Sanctions on\nCharter and International Human Rights\nProgram: \n9:00 a.m. Welcome: Renu Mandhane\, International Human Rights Program\nKey Note Speaker: Judge Kimberly Prost\, UN Ombudsperson for Al Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions \n9:45 – 11:00 Litigation Strategies\nSpeakers: Paul Champ – Counsel for Abdelrazik\nBen Wizner – Counsel for American Civil Liberties Union\n    Jeremy McBride – Barrister\, Chair of Interights\, U.K.\nModerator: Cheryl Milne\, David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights \n11:00 Break \n11:15 – 12:30 International Law and the Charter\nSpeakers: Professor David Dyzenhaus – Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto\nProfessor Kent Roach – Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto                                                                            Professor Michelle Gallant – Faculty of Law\, University of Manitoba\nModerator: Nathalie Des Rosiers\, Canadian Civil Liberties Association\nClosing Remarks: Sukanya Pillay\, Canadian Civil Liberties Association \nClick here for live webcast on November 19\, 2010 \nProgram Flyer \n  \nEvent date: Friday\, November 19\, 2010\, from 9:00 AM to 12:30 PM\nLocation: Bennet Lecture Hall\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/symposium-on-u-n-security-council-resolution-1267/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101122T143000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101122T170000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T151656Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T151656Z
UID:936-1290436200-1290445200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Reference re. Constitutionality of s.293 of the Criminal Code of Canada
DESCRIPTION:The hearing in the Court reference on the constitutionality of the polygamy prohibition in the Criminal Code of Canada commences in the British Columbia Supreme Court. \n  \nEvent date: Monday\, November 22\, 2010\, at 2:28 PM\nLocation: British Columbia Supreme Court\, Vancouver\, British Columbia \n 
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/reference-re-constitutionality-of-s-293-of-the-criminal-code-of-canada/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101129T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101129T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T180538Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T180538Z
UID:1026-1291033800-1291039200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Becoming Supreme: How Federalism Fosters Judicial Power
DESCRIPTION:Barry Friedman\nNew York University Law School  \nOne of the longstanding\, beguiling questions among scholars in several disciplines is how judicial power gains traction. Why do those setting up governments create an independent judiciary\, why or how does judicial review get a foothold\, and most important\, what is the fount of judiciall supremacy? Theories abound\, each problematic in some way. By looking at the answer to this question in the context of the Supreme Court of the United States\, we demonstrate the vital role a federal system can play in both the rise and maintenance of judicial supremacy. In a unitary (non-federal) system\, a judiciary possessing the power of judicial review necessarily will find itself frequently at odds with – and rarely helpful to – the governing regime. By contrast\, in a federal system\, the judiciary can provide vital support to the central government in suppressing outlier conduct. We describe the process by which this central insight accounts initially for “vertical” supremacy\, the supremacy of the Supreme Court over state and local governments and ultimately transforms itself into “horizontal” supremacy the binding effect of judicial pronouncements over the coordinate branches of the national government. This project is theoretical and historical both: it identifies the mechanisms for the transformation from vertical to horizontal supremacy\, and recounts how this occurred in the United States. While the historical detail is unique to the United States\, the model has the potential to explain the rise and maintenance of judicial supremacy in many countries across the globe. \nProfessor Friedman is one of the country’s leading authorities on constitutional law and the federal courts. He is a prolific scholar\, working at the intersections of law\, politics and history. Friedman teaches a wide variety of courses including Constitutional Law\, Federal Courts\, and Criminal Procedure. He writes extensively about judicial review\, constitutional law and theory\, federal jurisdiction and judicial behavior. His scholarship appears regularly in the nation’s top law and peer-edited reviews. He is the author of widely-recognized The Will of the People: How Public Opinion Has Influenced the Supreme Court and Shaped the Meaning of the Constitution (Farrar\, Strauss & Giroux\, 2009)\, which examines the history of the relationship between popular opinion and the Supreme Court\, from 1776 to the present. Along with his co-author Stephen Burbank\, Friedman co-edited and contributed to Judicial Independence at the Crossroads: An Interdisciplinary Approach\, which questions common assumptions about the nature of judicial independence and how it can be protected. The book has been cited and relied upon countless times by scholars and policymakers alike. Professor Friedman is a frequent contributor to the nation’s leading journals\, both on-line and print. His work has appeared in The New York Times\, Salon\, The Los Angeles Times\, Politico and The New Republic\, among others. Professor Friedman graduated from the University of Chicago and received his law degree magna cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center. He clerked for the Honorable Phyllis A. Kravitch of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit and also worked as a litigation associate at Davis\, Polk & Wardwell in Washington D.C. He was a professor at Vanderbilt Law School before joining the NYU faculty in 2000. In 1995 he won the Clarence Darrow Award from the ACLU of Tennessee for his work in defense of civil liberties. \nA light lunch will be served \n\n\n\n\nEvent date: Monday\, November 29\, 2010\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\n\n\n\n\nLocation: Faculty Common Room\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/becoming-supreme-how-federalism-fosters-judicial-power/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20110117T123000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20110117T140000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T151458Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T151458Z
UID:934-1295267400-1295272800@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Freedom of expression and the G20 — from the summit to today
DESCRIPTION:A screening of selections from Adam Letalik’s documentary Toronto G20 Exposed followed by a panel discussion on Charter rights\, particularly focused on the impact on freedom of expression. The panel will feature criminal lawyer John Norris on G20-related bail conditions\, Prof. David Schneiderman on Charter issues pertaining to the summit weekend including the Public Works Protection Act\, and Adam Letalik on his film and G20 experience. For more information\, please contact asper.projectg20@gmail.com \nPanel Discussion with: \nAdam Letalik is a documentary filmmaker for the website UnderOccupation.com. Adam is an independent financial investor\, specializing in gold and silver. In 2008\, he graduated from The University of British Columbia with a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology and a Minor in Economics and is currently independently studying the Austrian School of Economics online at the Mises Institute. In recent years\, Adam has been a political activist. \nProfessor David Schneiderman is Professor of Law and Political Science. He was called to the Bar of British Columbia in 1984 where he practised law and then served as Research Director of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association in Toronto from 1986-89. He was Executive Director of the Centre for Constitutional Studies\, an interdisciplinary research institute\, at the University of Alberta from 1989-99. Professor Schneiderman has authored numerous articles on Canadian federalism\, the Charter of Rights\, Canadian constitutional history\, and constitutionalism and globalization. He has authored Constitutionalizing Economic Globalization: Investment Rules and Democracy’s Promise (Cambridge University Press\, 2008) and co-authored The Last Word: Media Coverage of the Supreme Court of Canada with Florian Sauvageau and David Taras (UBC Press\, 2006). He is founding editor of the quarterly Constitutional Forum Constitutionnel and founding editor-in-chief of the journal Review of Constitutional Studies. \nJohn Norris is a practicing lawyer in Toronto. He received a B.A. (Honours Philosophy) from Carleton University in 1982 and an M.A. (Philosophy) from the University of Western Ontario in 1984. He received his LL.B. from the University of Toronto in 1991 and was called to the Bar of Ontario in 1993. Since then he has maintained a trial and appellate practice in the areas of criminal\, constitutional and national security law. He is an adjunct member of the Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto\, where he has taught Advanced Criminal Law\, Evidence Law\, Advanced Evidence and Legal Ethics\, and of Osgoode Hall Law School\, where he teaches in the part-time LL.M. Program in Criminal Law. He is the author of several scholarly articles\, an Assistant Editor of the Canadian Rights Reporter and a regular contributor to continuing legal education programs. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of Canadian Journalists for Free Expression. In 2008\, he was appointed by the Minister of Justice to the roster of Special Advocates for security certificate proceedings under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. \nEvent date: Monday\, January 17\, 2011\, from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM\nLocation: Room FLB\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, University of Toronto
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/freedom-of-expression-and-the-g20-from-the-summit-to-today/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20110203T160000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20110203T173000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T151302Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T151302Z
UID:932-1296748800-1296754200@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Constitutional Roundtable
DESCRIPTION:Is Coalition Government in Britain here to stay?\nProfessor Robert Hazell \nUniversity College London \n  \nThursday\, February 3\, 2011 \n4:00-5:30 p.m. \nBennett Lecture Hall\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law \n  \nProf Robert Hazell is Director of the Constitution Unit at University College London\, the UK’s leading research centre on constitutional reform. He was originally a barrister and then a senior civil servant\, and still works closely with Whitehall. In 2009 he produced a report on minority Parliaments and the challenges they would present for Westminster and Whitehall\, including the lessons to be learnt from Canada and New Zealand. That prompted the UK Cabinet Office to publish guidance on the key constitutional conventions before the 2010 general election. The guidance has since been consolidated in a new Cabinet Manual published in December. Prof Hazell advised on the new Cabinet Manual\, and is now conducting a study of how the new coalition government works. \n  \nIn a lecture co-sponsored by the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights\, Faculty of Law and the Department of Political Science\, Professor Hazell will explain the background to the new coalition government in the UK\, and explore its prospects. He will focus in particular on its plans for constitutional reform: fixed term parliaments\, the 2011 referendum on the voting system\, reducing the size of the House of Commons\, electing the House of Lords. He will conclude with reflections on whether coalition government might become the norm in future in the UK. \nThe lecture will be followed by a reception in the Rowell room with The Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson.
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/constitutional-roundtable/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20110401T130000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20110401T173000
DTSTAMP:20260417T201123
CREATED:20170621T150955Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20170621T150955Z
UID:928-1301662800-1301679000@aspercentre.ca
SUMMARY:Symposium: Funding the Charter Challenge
DESCRIPTION:Event date: Friday\, April 01\, 2011\, from 1:00 PM to 5:30 PM\nLocation: Bennet Lecture Hall\, Flavelle House\, Faculty of Law\, Universtity of Toronto \nLegal experts in practice and the academy provide information and commentary on the availability of funding for some of the most significant litigation in the country. How can you obtain advanced costs? Are class actions feasible in Charter claims? What are the reasonable and ethical limits of pro bono? Does the legal aid system adequately fund complex cases? \nSchedule \n\n1:00 Cost Strategies for Litigants\nPanel: Joseph Arvay\, Q.C.\, Arvay Finlay Barristers\nDouglas Elliott\, Roy Elliott O’Connor LLP\nDavid McKillop\, Legal Aid Ontario\n2:30 Break \n\n2:45 Access to Justice\, Professionalism and Ethics\nPanel: Prof. Janet Mosher\, Osgoode Hall Law School\nProf. Chris Tollefson\, Univ. of Victoria\nProf. Jasminka Kalajdzic\, Univ. of Windsor\n4:15 Break \n4:30 Morris A. Gross Memorial Lecture\nSpeaker: Marlys Edwardh\, C.M. \nThe lecture will be followed by a reception in the Rowell Room. \nLink to webcast \n \nThis program has been accredited by the Law Society for 1 hour toward\nthe annual Professionalism Requirement. \n 
URL:https://aspercentre.ca/event/symposium-funding-the-charter-challenge/
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR