Your search

The Lautsi decision reflects the deep ambivalence in Western liberal democracies about religion and its relationship to politics. Like the Canadian courts, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) seems to recognize that religion and politics should be separated but that this separation can never be total. While the ECtHR and the Supreme Court of Canada rely at least formally on a similar test for determining a breach of religious freedom (a test that emphasizes the state’s obligation to remain neutral in spiritual matters) their application of the test is guided by different understandings of the public/political significance of religion and more particularly the relationship between religion, civic values, and national identity. The Court in Lautsi seems to accept, or at least acquiesce in, two claims made by the Italian government about the meaning of the crucifix: that it symbolizes the Italian national identity, which is tied to its history as a Christian or Roman Catholic nation, and that it symbolizes the Christian foundation of the civic/secular values of the Italian political community – the values of democracy and tolerance. Behind the claim that the crucifix is not simply a religious symbol but also a symbol of the Italian identity and political culture, is the draw of a thicker or richer form of national identity than that offered by civic nationalism. The assumption is that Italians are held together in a political community not simply by their shared commitment to liberal values or democratic institutions but by a common culture rooted in a religious tradition. Religion and politics are joined at the core of national identity and the root of political obligation. This link between religion and politics, though, rests on the problematic claim that the values of democracy and tolerance emerged directly from Christianity (and are the logical, even necessary, outcome of Christian doctrine) and the disturbing claim that Christianity is uniquely tied to these values. While religion does sometimes intersect with politics in Canada, it no longer plays a role in the definition of the country’s national identity. Canada, sometime ago, embraced multiculturalism as the defining feature of its national identity and liberal-democratic values as its political bond. There is no doubt that Canada’s moral/social culture has been shaped in different ways by the Christian faith of earlier generations, nevertheless any attempt to formally link Canadian national identity to a particular religious tradition would run against the country’s self-conception as a multicultural (multi-faith) society.

The development of the right to return to one's home of origin -- Modern experiences with post-conflict restitution and return -- Restitution and return "home" -- Local integration and the regularization of collective centre space -- Compensation and regularizing secondary occupation

Gemma Smyth, 2012 1-1 Canadian Journal of Poverty Law 145, 2012 CanLIIDocs 721

Vaillancourt's book is reviewed in the context of the Social Assistance Review in Ontario.

Roderick A Macdonald, Gemma Smyth, Maggie Liddle, Jenny Buchan, Tracy Wilcox, Dale Dewhurst, David Newlyn, Liesel Spencer, Mary J Shariff, Vanessa MacDonnell, 2012 6 Canadian Legal Education Annual Review, 2012 CanLIIDocs 705

In the past decade or so, one has seen an increase in the use of the term “inquisitorial” with it becoming de rigueur for many instances of non-adversarial decision-making in the administrative state. The phenomenon of terming non-adversarial administrative process as inquisitorial, is not peculiar to Canada. In other Commonwealth jurisdictions where the adversarial tradition prevails, such as Australia and the UK, a similar phenomenon has occurred. Similarly, in the United States, the Supreme Court has labeled the federal Social Security adjudicatory scheme an inquisitorial procedure, owing in part to the investigatory nature of the Administrative Law Judge. Despite the classification, in most jurisdictions around the world, the meaning of the term “inquisitorial” refers to many different concepts and processes that often do not replicate the pure inquisitorial model that originated in the Civil Law tradition. This article reports on an international research workshop that brought together academics, policy-makers, and judges who have served as Commissioners of public inquiries, to discuss polyjural decision-making in the administrative state. Participants stemmed from traditionally adversarial and inquisitorial jurisdictions, generating innovative comparative insights on hybridized administrative process and institutional design, in relation to hearing processes, legislative oversight, ombudsman, public inquiries and administrative investigations. The conference website can be found at: http://www.uwindsor.ca/law/inquisitorial-processes/ .

Judicial dispute resolution is common in family courts, where it usually consists of informal efforts to bring about settlement in pre-trial conferences. Many judges are especially eager to promote settlement in child custody and visitation cases. This paper will critically evaluate informal JDR in parenting disputes, by asking whether and to what extent it is in the best interests of the children involved. It begins by identifying several features which distinguish custody and access disputes from other types of civil litigation, and which are relevant to the normative analysis of JDR in this context.

Victor Kattan’s “From Coexistence to Conquest: International Law and the Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 1891-1949” is an archival excavation of the Israeli-Palestinian (Arab-Israeli) conflict and its origins. This review will examine the contours of Kattan’s book followed by a brief examination of objectivity in academic scholarship often enunciated through the concept of ‘balance’ as it relates to those scholars (like Kattan) working on the conflict. Finally, this review will explore some of the weakness of the arguments that Kattan advances.

North American family law conflicts are very often brought to mediation, in which a neutral third party attempts to bring about a voluntary resolution of the spouses’ dispute. Family mediation has many enthusiastic supporters, and has in many jurisdictions been made a mandatory precursor to traditional litigation. However, it has also given rise to a potent feminist critique, which identifies power imbalance and domestic violence as sources of exploitation and unjust mediated outcomes. This article summarizes the feminist critique of family mediation, and assesses the efforts of contemporary mediation practice to respond to it. Even in the absence of formal family mediation, litigating spouses are likely to be subjected to substantial informal pressure to settle from judges and other family justice system workers. The article argues that the feminist critique might be more relevant to this “settlement mission” than it is to formal family mediation as it is practiced today.

Client interviewing is a cornerstone of lawyer-client relationships, particularly in often high-conflict child protection matters. This practical article focuses on the initial interview of adult clients involved in child protection matters. Part I sets out the social context of interviewing caregivers. Part II describes the theories of client-centred and engaged client-centred lawyering employed throughout the paper. Given the context and theory, Part III sets out four key stages of interviewing that may prove difficult for new lawyers: rapport-building, fact gathering, reality checking and concluding.

Mediation in the case of elder abuse and mistreatment is increasingly employed in North America to resolve conflicts that disproportionately affect older adults. The attendant dangers of mediation in these cases require awareness of and sensitivity to issues facing older adults and their families, including elder abuse, ageism, and consent and capacity. This article charts the introductory stages of an elder mistreatment mediation project started through a law school-based mediation clinic. Responding to expressed local need, the project developed an Intake Guide that attempts to balance the autonomy of the older adult with safety screening. The model employs an interdisciplinary approach, with specialist social workers acting as advocates throughout the process. Lessons learned from the project include: the importance of training; the need for flexible and responsive approaches to mediation; the importance of a specialized intake and screening tool; the benefits of interdisciplinary, strengths-based approaches and the centrality of collaborative community relationships to ensure program sustainability.

The judicial role in child custody and visitation disputes has traditionally been understood as one of authoritative decision-making. However this new empirical research suggests that many family court judges prioritize the pursuit of voluntary settlement in pre-trial conferences, using evaluative and facilitative mediation techniques. Drawing on qualitative interviews with judges and other family law professionals in Toronto and New York City, this article identifies points of consensus and controversy among settlement-seeking family judges. Despite the general support for settlement-seeking, there are substantial differences of opinion regarding coercion, due process, and the meaning of the best interests of the child standard.