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: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
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20101106T083000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20101106T170000
DTSTAMP:20260420T030448
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:20260420T030448
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:20260420T030448
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:20260420T030448
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:20260420T030448
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
END:VCALENDAR