QQUUIIDD NNOOVVIIMcGill University, Faculty of LawVolume 28, no. 19, March 11 2008

MONTREAL

RECRUITMENT

ISSUE

IN THIS ISSUE...3...Why yes, I amcontemplating a lifein Montreal

4... Le Barreau:Things they NeverTold Me

4... Lawmericks:The RecruitmentGeneration

6...Confessions of aRecruitment DramaQueen

10...What Kind ofRecruitee are You?

12...Dating in theFacebook Era

15... Third AnnualConference on Stu-dent Publishing inLaw

16...The LSA’s FreeSpeech Problem

19...Law in Cambodia: Gettingit on our Minds

The Quid Novi is published weekly by the students of the Faculty of Law at McGill University. Production is made possible through the direct support of students.

All contents copyright 2006 Quid Novi.

Les opinions exprimées sont propres aux auteurs et ne réflètent pas nécessairement celles de l’équipe du Quid Novi.

The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the McGill Law Students’ Association or of McGill University.

Envoyez vos commentaires ou articles avant jeudi 5pm à l’adresse: quid.law@mcgill.ca

Toute contribution doit indiquer l’auteur et son origine et n’est publiée qu’à la discrétion du comité de rédaction, qui basera sa décisionsur la politique de rédaction telle que décrite à l’adresse:

http://www.law.mcgill.ca/quid/epolicy/html.

Contributions should preferably be submitted as a .doc attachment.

QUID NOVI

3661 Peel StreetMontréal, Québec

H2A 1X1(514) 398-4430

www.law.mcgill.ca/quid

Editors in ChiefCassandra BrownAndrea Gorys

Managing EditorsRaffaela Commodari

Matt Maloley

Layout EditorsAlison Adam

Sandrina AntohiAlicia DepraeterJohn LofrancoMartin Rioux

Associate EditorsBruce Carlini

Jake Hirsch-AllenMaha HussainAli KhanIlia K

Thomas LiptonKristin McHaleJulien MorissettePalma PacioccoColin Schulhauser

Staff WritersNick DoddIlan Gabizon

Ryan KirshenblattMathieu Kissin

Web EditorOwen Ripley

EDITORIALby Cassandra BrownCo-Editor-in-Chief

QUID NOVI

2

For some of us, it’s animportant week. Mon-treal recruitment is

gearing up, and that meanssome intense days aheadfilled with interviews, firmtours, dinners, cocktails andschmoozing in general.

In this weather, I guess Ishould feel lucky that it’snot me worrying about howto navigate 5 foot snowbanks in heels and still ar-rive at the right office ontime looking impeccable.Still, I can’t truthfully saythat I’m completely withoutenvy. Everyone knows thatMontreal has a style all itsown, and this doesn’t stopwhen it comes to the prac-tice of law - there are differ-ent firms, different enjeuxand different challenges forpotential recruitees. I can’thelp but be a little bit disap-pointed that I never had theopportunity to experience it.

As you will see in this issue,many students and profes-sionals are enthusiasticabout taking on these chal-lenges, for a variety of dif-ferent reasons. Andrew

Biteen trots out his mostconvincing quality-of-lifebased arguments to keepyou around in his article,“Why Yes, I am Contemplat-ing a Life in Montreal”. Hiswords echo many an argu-ment that I have heard oflate, including one particu-larly vehement one thatended with the lamentation,“A Premiere Moisson onevery corner! Gorgeouscheap renovated apart-ments in the Plateau! Quietwalks through the park aftera (gargantuan) snowfall!How can I be leaving thisbehind?!”

To soothe the nerves ofanyone still worrying aboutthe upcoming recruitmentprocess, I compiled a list ofrecruitment bloopers com-mitted by McGillians in“Confessions of a Recruit-ment Drama Queen”. Youwill be relieved to know thatall of these anonymous con-fessors ended up with jobs -and if they can do it, thereis no doubt that you cantoo! For fun, you can also

See Editorial, p 6

MARCH 11, 2008

3

WHY YES, I AM CONTEMPLATING A LIFE

IN MONTREALby Andrew Biteen (LAW III)

Last Tuesday was a bigday for me and my city.First, this publication’s

redoubtable Albertan editorreferred to Montreal as“Central Canada,” probablythe first time that anyonefrom west of Kenora gotthat one right. At lastcount, I saw four provincesto the right and five to theleft of me.

On the same Tuesday, inkeeping with the centralitytheme, our Dean an-nounced that there wouldbe a panel for those of uscontemplating a career inMontreal, featuring theprodigal sons of this faculty:jurists who used to live else-where, but have returned tothe pastures of Ville-Marie.With 4 law firm partnersand a partner from the spe-cial effects team behind DieHard 4 and Blades of Glory(Will Ferrell movie, not theNintendo game), I imaginethat the pastures they nowgraze are mighty green.

Yet while making moneymight convince some of youto contemplate careers inMontreal, I’d like to list thenon-pecuniary reasons tocontemplate living here. Iam not organizing a panel,but tend to orate at lengthon each of these subjects,so just call me up. Beloware my own 5 reasons tochoose Montreal.

1. Ethnic Strife Done Right(mostly) – 120 years ago,Montreal had 2 groups thatwere separated by St.Lawrence Boulevard (orBoulevard St. Laurent): The

“we’re not-French” and“nous ne sommes pasanglais.” Only 120 yearsbefore that, they had beenat war. Then, in the late19th century, other groupslanded right on the Main,trapped in No Man’s Land.What emerged over thenext 120 years was thetransformation of the battleinto a multi-sensory ethnog-raphy of smelly foods, loudlanguages, flashy dances,and thousands of guys inSt. Leonard waving flagsand honking horns for daysafter the 2006 World Cup.How else can you explainthe social harmony in a citywhere the best cheap foodis Jewish (St Viateur bagelsand Smoked Meat Petesmoked meat) andLebanese (Boustan chickenshawarma) and the bestplaces I can’t afford areFrench (Toqué) and Impe-rial English (MountStephens Club). Ratherthan race riots or segre-gated schools as they’vehad in New York or Toronto,Montreal has the MainStreet Festival.

2. Inefficiency (the lowcrime solution) – In thebook Freakonomics, StevenLevitt and Stephen Dubnerattach the past 25 years’drop in crime in the UnitedStates to Roe v Wade deci-sion. In Montreal, the ubiq-uitous inefficiency of publicand private workers hasdone the trick. It’s prettyhard to head out and steal acar when the roads haven’tbeen cleared. Likewise,good luck gathering a gangof criminals when that kind

of organization skill wouldprobably over qualify youfor most jobs that the Mon-treal economy produces.

3. Nostalgia on Saturdays(and bitching Sunday-Fri-day) – If there’s one thingthat Montrealers do great,it’s reminisce on the 1950’sHabs, the 1960’s nightlife,the 1970’s Olympics, the1980’s Expos, and the1990’s collapse of the realestate market and accom-panying $150 rents. Whilethe local AM radio maylament the current state ofour sports and culturalscenes, Montrealers gener-ally prefer inconsistentsporting results, a diminish-ing international stature,and getting shafted by theirlandlords. It builds whatRobert Putnam calls “SocialCapital” and he’s taught inEngland and the UnitedStates (which, I gather, iswhere people still contem-plating not working in Mon-treal are looking)

4. Coolopolis.blogspot.com– Now I know you probablythink blogs are the pocketprotectors of the 21stcentury (CEGEP stu-dents, ask your par-ents or profs what apocket protector is).Not long ago, Iwould have agreed.However, this siteencompasseseverything that isgreat about Mon-treal. History les-sons about thegood/bad old days; An-glos trying to prove thatthey are a distinct culture

in a distinct culture (Dorch-ester Street?); and picturesof old, ugly, run-down build-ings that only a Montrealerwould fight to preserve(shout out to Goose Vil-lage!). On the next sunnyday, check out this site andjust try to resist the urge tobike around town.

5. It’s better than whereveryou’re from or thinking ofgoing – This is what it reallycomes down to and onceyou get over your petty jeal-ousies, you’ll realize it too.Montrealers have betterstyle than you, work lessthan you, live better thanyou, eat better than you,speak more languages thanyou, make better musicthan you, have a lowercrime rate than you, winmore Stanley Cups thanyou, get more political at-tention around Canada thanyou, and are basically coolerthan you. Oh yeah, and wealso have partners at ourlaw firms who used to workelsewhere and now workhere, presumably by choice.

QUID NOVI

4

First the bad news:every terrifying rumouryou have heard about

the Quebec Bar course istrue.

But the good news is, well,that there’s good news! Idon’t know why nobodyever bothered to tell methis. So here it is: an exclu-sive insider report on le boncôté du Barreau. No, I havenot branched off into fiction.

I should make it clear fromthe outset that my experi-ence is limited to the courseoffered by the Barreau deHull at the University of Ot-tawa. That being said, thereshould be plenty of carry-over to the other schools.

I am registered in the after-noon class: 1:00 p.m. to5:00 p.m. each weekday.This means that my currentschedule combines thehealthy predictability of my

working life with the invalu-able flexibility of my studentlife. Sure, it takes me five toseven hours to prepareeach four-hour class, butmy meals and sleep pat-terns are regular, and I haveno problem making appoint-ments to see doctors, den-tists, bankers, etc. I imaginethat this is equally true forthe morning students.

Here in Ottawa, we are di-vided into four sections: twoin the morning and two inthe afternoon, with about adozen students per section.Small groups are good forthe kind of learning we aredoing. Some instructors callon us individually, while oth-ers just wait for people tovolunteer. Either way, mostpeople participate. We havelearned to trust one anothernot to laugh at our mis-takes. This is a must whenyou have about a 50-50chance of getting the right

answer and you have topipe up several times perclass.

I don’t know whether it issimply because we havebeen blessed with a stringof good instructors, or be-cause we have learned notto care what the instructorsthink, but I have come toconsider my bar classrooma very safe environment inwhich to make mistakes andlearn from them. I recentlywrote a tongue-in-cheek ar-ticle about the benefits ofintegrating small doses ofshame into the learningprocess, but I have recentlyrevised my opinion.

Getting it right on the firsttry is not the goal at all. Thegoal is to assimilate a largeamount of detailed materialin a relatively short period.Getting it wrong and havinga patient instructor (orclassmate) help get you

back on track is often amore effective path to thereal goal than hitting on theright answer by accidentand promptly forgetting it.Sometimes I do get it rightthe first time, but hearing itexplained to another stu-dent (or better still, explain-ing it myself) makes it stickbetter. It is our collective lit-tle failures that help usalong, not the shame thatwe too often associate withthem. If we can reap theeducational benefits of fail-ure without feeling theshame at all, so much thebetter!

The Director and staff arecompetent and friendly.Some of the rules feel dra-conian and our exam resultscan be discouraging, butthey go out of their way tomake sure everyone istreated as equally and fairlyas possible. With rare ex-ceptions, our instructorshave been excellent so far.Some are law professorswith plenty of teaching ex-perience; others are practi-tioners who know theirfields well and are

See Barreau, p 9

LAWMERICKS: THE RECRUITMENT

GENERATIONby Stephanie Jones’ Admirer (LAW III)

I hoped to find work dans un bon cabinetBut my instincts me disaient “You can’t go away!!”

For outside cette provinceThere is no freaking chance

Que les clients comprendraient mon awful franglais !

LE BARREAU: THINGS THEYNEVER TOLD MEby Francie Gow (ALUM I)

11 MARS 2008

5

QUID NOVI

6

CONFESSIONS OF A RECRUITMENT

DRAMA QUEENby Cassandra Brown (LAW III)

Don’t feel bad that youforgot the senior part-ner’s name thirty sec-

onds after you heard it - itcould be way worse! Thefollowing tales of recruit-ment woe are all true (butshall remain anonymous).Read on for real McGillians’confessions...

“I was already running latefor my interview withDreamfirm LLP when theheel of my shoe got caughtin a sidewalk grate outsidetheir building! In my franticattempt to get it out, theheel broke off! I had tolimp inside, find a shoestore and buy a new pair inabout 2 minutes!” - Morti-fied in Montreal

“I had seafood from a fastfood place for lunch, thenheaded off to my interviewwith Favefirm LLP. About 10minutes into the interview Iwas so ill that I couldn’t re-spond to the questions thatHigh-Profile-Partner wasasking me. I had to ask toplease be excused and runto the washroom. I got thejob anyway.” - Embarrasedbut Employed

“After talking authoritativelyabout a certain case in aninterview, I realized that itwas the wrong case! I hadsaid the name of one caseand then recited the factsfrom another!” - Belle-Province Blunderer

“I lost my cell phone aboutthirty minutes before calltime. After a brief franticsearch I realized that I musthave set it down some-

where inside of the last firmI visited. I had to call theassociate who had given mean office tour out of a meet-ing to take me office to of-fice retracing our steps,until we finally found thephone in Senior-Partner’soffice. He was also havinga meeting, which I had tointerrupt to dash in andgrab my phone!” - ForeverForgetful

“I started my interview with‘what I like about X-firm is…’Unfortunately, I was inter-viewing at Y-firm!” - Con-fused Candidate

“The firm I wanted hosted apub night…I brought alongmy friend so that I wouldhave someone to talk towhen I walked in. My friendalready had a job, so didn’tcare about the impression

that he made on this firm.He got wasted and I had toinconspicuously drag himout without the partnersseeing that he was withme!” - Dead-end Friend

‘When asked which parts ofRoman Law I enjoyed themost (I had said that it wasmy favorite class), I acci-dentally said - ‘the recentdevelopments in it’!” - His-tory Buff-oon

‘I was talking too much atdinner to eat much, and Iskipped lunch because Iwas running late. I didn’trealize this until I felt sickafter two glasses of wine -and had to run out of anevent into a taxi because Iwas so sick!” - UnhealthilyUnfed

Editorial, Contd.

check out Alison Glaser’s-recruitee typologies to seeif you fit into one of thecategories more obviouslythananother (first years,you can consider this exer-cise practice for your civillaw property final).

As for any fears of moremedium term conse-quences resulting fromyour decision to practicelaw in Quebec - I refer inparticular to the dreadedBarreau - hopefully theywill be much alleviated byAlumnus Francie Gow’spositive testimonial of herexperience at Quebec BarSchool to date.

Best wishes to everyonein the process. If nothingelse, I hope that readingthis issue affords you afew moments of distractionas you are waiting aroundbetween interviews.

To everyone else, pleasewish your recruiting friendsgood luck - after all, youeither already benefittedfrom your friends’ supportwhile you were recruiting,or you’re going to appreci-ate it when you are con-ducting your job hunt inthe future.

7

MARCH 11, 2008

QUID NOVI

8

9

Barreau, Contd.

committed to helping thenext generation ease intothe profession. Their pa-tience for answering ourquestions is without limit.Another pleasant surprise isthe quality of the coursematerials.

Instead of being pulled inevery direction, as we areduring the degree, at theBar we do not have towaste time deciding whichsubjects to prioritize in agiven week. There is a cer-tain amount of material toget through each day, andyou just get to it. It’s a bitlike travelling through Eu-

rope at lightening speed onan organized tour (if it’sTuesday, this must be Fam-ily Law), but it helps to keepus focused. This approach isalso what gives us that “for-est” perspective I wroteabout not so long ago. It isa relief to see that it all fitstogether. Well, maybe notperfectly, but at least moreneatly than we ever sus-pected in first year. At McGillI gradually gained confi-dence in my ability to con-quer courses; at the Bar, forthe first time, I am gainingconfidence that I am indeedcapable of practising law if Iwant to.

The substantive law days,which make up the bulk of

our program, are inter-spersed with hands-on,pass-fail workshops in draft-ing, negotiation, consulta-tion and pleading. Theseused to scare the pants offme. Now that I have done afew, I see them as a wel-come change of rhythm.They generally cover theareas of law that are fresh-est in our minds, so that weare not struggling to re-member legal conceptswhile simultaneously tryingto master interview tech-niques. I was afraid thatwriting in my second lan-guage would be a problem,but we have plenty of ex-amples at our fingertips.There is little pressure, lotsof guidance, and the feeling

that we are actually improv-ing as we go along. Welaugh a lot.

Lest you start believing thatI’m actually having a goodtime in here, I should statefor the record that this isthe hardest, scariest, mostgruelling thing I have everdone, and I can’t wait tohave my life back. I justwant to take my 60 pointsand run, and I live in coldfear of finishing with a 58 or59. But I won’t dwell onthat right now. If you arethinking of signing up forthe Barreau, the bad newsis sure to find you withoutmy help.

Women and the Law Issue

March 18, 2008

Submit Articles Today!

11 MARS 2008

QUID NOVI

10

Ahh recruitment. I havejust started this joyousexperience this week

and am looking forward todaily panty-hose wearingand lots of schmoozing. Ihonestly did not really thinkabout recruitment much formy first few years here, butit seems to me there arecertain types that are goingthrough this process rightnow. They are:

1) The “I’ve Been Wait-ing My Whole Life forThis!”Type

These people came to lawschool to get a job in a firm.They love the idea of work-

ing a lot and being in a suitevery day excites them.Speaking of suits, theirshave been ready since Sep-tember in anticipation ofCourse aux Stages. Whenthey talk about working incorporate law, they glow.They are very happy rightnow and will become greatlawyers.

2) The Willy-Wallies

These people came to lawschool for some reason orother, or maybe they actu-ally didn’t have a reason butthey finished their under-grad and thought “huh,what now?” and law

seemed like as good achoice as any. They haveenjoyed their studies, a fewareas are appealing, butthey are really not entirelysure what they want to donext. Since they are notsure, they figure they’llwork somewhere that canexpose them to a lot of dif-ferent things and pay theirBarreau fees. These peopleare a little bit overwhelmedright now.

3) The Save-the-Worlds

These people came to lawschool to save the world.They have been active par-ticipants in the Human

Rights and Environmentalgroups. They are passionateand articulate about whatthey love. They are applyingto law firms for one of sev-eral reasons: The firms theychose have some public orenvironmental law sectionsand they figure, hey, I cansave the world and be paidat the same time; they wantto get some experience inthe corporate world so theycan be secure in their deci-sion to reject it later on andbe content with the subse-quent salary cut; they havebecome totally disillusionedwith world saving and re-cruitment just seems somuch, what’s theword…easier. They are a bitgrumpy right now.

4) The Recruitment Sluts

These people love inter-views. They love seeingwhat’s out there. They gothrough every single recruit-ment session just to makesure that the job theychoose is absolutely thebest they could get. Unfor-tunately, you do not knowthese people because theyhave not been in a singleclass since first year Torontorecruitment. These peopleare very happy right now,not that you’d ever notice.

But really, no matter what, Iam fully confident that wewill all end up doing some-thing that is interesting andworthwhile and personallyfulfilling. So, bonne chancea mes collègues pour lacourse aux stages, don’tforget to sleep and eat, andmaybe go to class everyonce in a while. I hope youall get the dream job.

Editor’s note: Alison de-clined to comment on whichtype of recruitee she is.

WHAT KIND OF A RECRUITEE

ARE YOU?by Alison Glaser (LAW III)

WOMEN

AND THE

LAWISSUE

MARCH 18,2008

11

MARCH 11, 2008

QUID NOVI

It was really nice meetingyou. So...could I Face-book you sometime?”

And they say chivalry isdead. If typing a girl’s namein a search bar and addingher to your intimate 300-plus group of friends is notromantic, then I don’t knowwhat is.

The popularity of Facebookis changing the rules of thedating game. For the fewpeople like me who categor-ically refuse to buy a cellphone, Facebook has its ob-vious advantages. On thedown side, it’s likely mucheasier to remember sevendigits than the correctspelling of my name (oreven just my name, for thatmatter). Nonetheless, Face-book is the dating way ofthe future and a girl willever after be left to answerthe same timeless question:“should I confirm, ignore, orlimited-profile him?”

The answer is more obvious

for some than for others.First, there are those whomyou don’t entirely remembermeeting and you’re certainyou never told them yourname, but somehow theyfound you. Though they getan A+ for their investigativeefforts, they ultimately failbecause of their borderlinestalking tendency. Then,there are those whom youwere properly introduced toand they eventually said:“I’ll add you on Facebook.”And with those ferventwords, they swept you offyour feet.

So you let them into yourvirtual reality. Two possibili-ties present themselves:they can either send you amessage and create a confi-dential bond, or they canjoin the majority (i.e.friends you never talk toand eventually become un-aware of their existenceuntil the day they post theirwedding pictures on Face-book and you happen to run

across them in your NewsFeed.) If the latter happens,at least you’ll know when tostop considering sendingthem a message suggestingto go for coffee.

The most interesting aspectof Facebook is that you cancover all the first date con-versation material from thecomfort of your home. Infact, you can decidewhether or not to go onthat date based on what theperson’s profile has taughtyou. Granted that there ismore to people than whatthey post on Facebook,since the information postedis purely voluntary, certainthresholds can be estab-lished. If the best you cando with your FavouriteQuotes section is: “get richor die trying” then we can’tbe friends.

This pre-emptive refusal isonly speeding up an other-wise costly and time-con-suming process of getting to

know how incom-patible you are.The end result isinevitably thesame. As helpfulas this techniquemay be to scancandidates, it alsobears a seriousrisk: your firstdate may ulti-mately be boringand awkward ifyou can finisheach other’s sen-tences with “yeah,I saw your pic-tures of that.”

Some argue thatFacebook takes

away from the process ofgetting to know someone,from the mystery of meet-ing new people. Othersthink it just saves muchneeded time in our fast-paced society. A word ofwarning to Facebook keen-ers though: if you chose topick-up with a click of themouse, you must be pre-pared to get rejected just aseasily. The traditional (gen-dered) story goes some-thing like this: boy meetsgirl, boy adds girl on Face-book, boy’s friend request isignored. No closure, no ex-planation, no opportunityfor the innovative “it’s notyou, it’s me” defence. Therejection is as virtual as theintention to pursue some-thing.

If you can end a first datewith a decision to dodgeany future calls, why notmake any future contact im-possible by blocking a Face-book friend? Is removing afriend any harsher than pre-tending not to hear yourphone?

Are awkward silences a nec-essary part of getting toknow someone? Is a one-liner any more effectivethan a Poke? Facebook isyet another way we're tak-ing out the “touch” from“keeping in touch.” It boilsdown to a fundamentalquestion: how much do wereally value direct humancontact? At the end of theday, keeping your Relation-ship Status alive may re-quire more face-to-face andless Wall-to-Wall.

DATING IN THE FACEBOOK ERAby Stavroula Papadopoulos (LAW I)

12

13

11 MARS 2008

It’s all Obiter, Baby!Friday, April 11th, 2008

Hotel Omni Mont-Royal1050 Sherbrooke St. W.

Cocktails 7pm-9pmDancing 9pm-2am

Questions? E-Mail gradball2008@gmail.com

Tickets $55.00

On sale as of March 18th

Join us for:

Dress: Semi-Formal

Come out and celebrate your remarkable achievement…We promise an evening of elegance, class and entertainment!

Many thanks to the Dean’s Discretionary Fund for its generous contribution

Graduation Ball2008

14

QUID NOVI

Latin American Legal Studies Association (LALSA)Association d’études en droit latino-américain (AEDLA)

Associación para el estudio del derecho latinomericano (AEDLA)

presents / présente / presenta

as part of the Conference Series on Latin American Lawdans le cadre de la Série de conférences sur le droit latino-américain

en el contexto de la Serie de conferencias sobre el derecho latinoamericano

The Inter-American System for the Promotion andProtection of Human Rights

Le système interaméricain de promotion et protection des droits de l’homme El sistema interamericano de promoción y protección de los derechos humanos

Panel discussion / Table-ronde / Mesa redonda*

� Luis Toro UtillanoOffice of International Law, Organization of American States – Legal Advisor

� Olger I. González-EspinozaInter-American Court of Human Rights – Staff Coordinator Attorney

*Presentations will be given in the presenter’s language of choice.

Wednesday, March 19th, 5pm

McGill University Faculty of Law, Chancellor Day Hall, 3644 Peel Street, Moot Court

A cocktail will follow in the Atrium.

http://lalsa.mcgill.ca

15

Last week, I had theprivilege of attendingthe University of

Toronto Faculty of Law Re-view’s Third Annual Confer-ence on Student Publishingin Law. Since 2006, theConference has become anannual event, held in Febru-ary at U of T. The Confer-ence brings togetherpractitioners, academics,and student presenterseager to publish their firstarticles in a scholarly jour-nal.

This was my second oppor-tunity to participate at theConference. I went to myfirst conference in 2006 as astudent author. This year, Iparticipated as a panelist,moderation, and guestspeaker.

The 2008 edition of theConference featured papersdealing with penalty clausesin contract law to usinganti-terror legislation to pro-mote Canadian corporatesocial responsibility abroad.It welcomed student pre-senters from the U of T, Os-goode Hall, Queen’s and theUniversity of Ottawa. Ahighlight of the event was atalk by Professor Peter Hoggin the Faculty lounge oncomparative constitutionallaw and the role thata justification clause canplay in the legislativeprocess.

The Conference has becomesuch a success not only be-cause of the creativity ofstudent research and writ-ing, but because of demo-cratic administration of the

Law Review. The Law Re-view’s editorial staff is quitelarge. It includes around100 students with differentacademic interests and per-sonalities.

The Law Review also pridesitself on giving detailedcomments back to the stu-dent authors who are oftenlearning how to polish apaper submitted for creditinto a full-fledged academicpublication. They regardtheir review work as part anexercise in public relations.

By hosting the Conferenceeach year, the editors alsoactively engage with manyof the authors who publishin their journal. This givesthe authors a chance to par-ticipate more actively in thepublication process, and al-lows them to respond tosome of the criticism of theexternal reviewers. The au-thors also gain intimate in-sights into the editorialprocess.

The Law Review accepts pa-pers on a variety of topicsfrom authors who wouldotherwise not have a forumto publish in because oftheir student status. It pro-vides a first step for youngscholars who are looking tospread their ideas about thelaw (or justice) to the aca-demic and practice commu-nities. Articles in the LawReview have been cited bytheSupreme Court (amongother courts) and are avail-able, along with articles inother national law reviews,on Quicklaw and Carswell

too.

For me, the benefits of myinitial (and continuing) par-ticipation in the Conferencehave been significant. Aswith any first attempt at awriting endeavour, be it alegal memo, a factum, or ascholarly article, the first at-tempt is often the most dif-ficult and timeconsuming. But, with timeand practice the process be-comes easier. I have noticednow that the turn aroundtime from drafting to publi-cation has become muchshorter and that I haveovercome many of the tech-nically difficulties (properformatting, citation, wordchoice) which made theprocess so difficult for thefirst article.

The Conference also rein-forced theimportanceof peer-to-peer re-view, whichis a func-tion of dia-loguebetweenthe re-viewer andthe writer.It oftentakessomeoneto ask thequestion“what isthis paperall about?”for thewriter tostep backand realizethat she or

he has not clearly articu-lated the argument in di-gestible sound-bytes.state

hesesound-bytes include acoherent thesis ment, point-first topic sen-tences, and a conclusionwhich situates the argumentwithin the literature, con-fines the scope of the paper,and poses questions for fu-ture discussion.

For anyone who wants agood chance to take apaper to publication or whojust wants to become a bet-ter writer, I encourage youto participate in next year’sConference. I expect thatthe Faculty of Law Review’sConference on Student Pub-lishing in Law will, for a longtime, be a lively annualevent.

THIRD ANNUAL CONFERENCE ON STU-DENT PUBLISHING IN LAWby Joshua Krane (LAW IV)

MARCH 11, 2008

An updated set of by-laws has been dis-cussed and adopted

by the LSA Council at its lasttwo meetings. Among otherprovisions, the new by-lawsprohibit any use of the In-ternet (including email andFacebook) for the purposesof campaigning for LSAelections. The only excep-tion will be a single onlinegroup or discussion forumwhy the Chief Returning Of-ficer (CRO) may create,maintain and supervise. Ibelieve that the ban on on-line campaigning is a seri-ous limitation of ourfreedom of expression andright to democratic partici-pation. The ban should bereversed.

A number of justificationswere advanced for the banof online campaigning. Theban was said to help main-tain the faculty’s atmos-phere of cosiness andcollegiality; to help the CROmonitor violations of othercampaigning rules, such asthe prohibition against slan-dering one’s opponents; andto ensure equality of oppor-tunity among the competingcandidates, by reducing thecost (in time as well asmoney) of campaigning. Ifind none of these justifica-tions persuasive.

To put things into context:online campaigning wasbanned under the old by-laws. This rule was hon-oured in the breach at leastas much as in the obser-vance, emails to friends andFacebook status updates

being routinely used to pro-mote one’s candidacy. Itsinadequacy was demon-strated, in my opinion, inthe Shee v CRO J-Boardcase, which should haveproved once and for all thata ban was untenable andwould inevitably be broken.In 2008, banning onlinecommunication, for any pur-pose, is about as practicalas outlawing snowstorms.

In defence of the ban, itssupporters argue that theapparently strict and rigidrules will only be selectivelyenforced, so as to avoid ex-treme applications. For ex-ample, a candidate emailinghis friends to encouragethem to vote for him willnot sanctioned since thisapparent violation of thecampaigning rules will prob-ably not be reported to theCRO. Yet arguably, this is ademonstration of the ban’simpracticality rather than ofits appropriateness. Indeed,creating rules which thoseto whom they apply will beimplicitly encouraged to vio-late is quite absurd. In addi-tion, selective enforcementof rules creates potential forarbitrary or simply randomdecisions by the CRO, forexample if one candidate’sactions happen to be re-ported but not similar onesby his or her competitor.

Furthermore, the ban is se-rious infringement on ourdemocratic rights which, aslaw students, we shouldseek to uphold. It impedescommunication betweencandidates and voters,

which should be as free aspossible if the LSA electionsare to be genuinely demo-cratic. As most, if not all ofus, rely on the Internet fora substantial part of oureveryday communications,especially with people wecannot reach or meet inperson, banning its use forelection campaigns is a se-vere limit on our freedom tocommunicate and thus toexpress ourselves. In partic-ular, it prevents candidatesfrom explaining their plat-form in any detail to most oftheir constituents withwhom they do not attendclasses and whom they donot have the time or the op-portunity to meet in person– which means of the stu-dent body, especially since acampaign only lasts threedays. It denies the opportu-nity to make an informeddecision to those studentswho are unable to be at thefaculty during those threedays – such as those whoare away on exchange andwho can take part in theelections thanks to onlinevoting. It thus favours acampaign based on namerecognition (which can beespecially unfair to first-yearcandidates running againstupper-years) instead of ac-tual issues.

In the name of what highideals are we to acceptthese strict limits on ourfreedom of expression? Afirst justification advancedby the ban’s supporters isthe need to maintain thefaculty’s atmosphere of col-legiality and friendliness. Yetit is not at all clear how thecandidates’ ability to com-municate their platforms tovoters would undermine thisatmosphere. And even as-suming that using internetwill allow candidates to en-gage in more vigorous de-

bate, it does not follow thatsuch debate will not be re-spectful and that it willdamage the faculty’s cozyatmosphere. Besides, as thefirst-year elections last falldemonstrated, a ban on in-ternet campaigning doesnot guarantee absence ofacrimony or prevent bitterdivisions.

A second argument in sup-port of the ban, related tothe preceding one but morespecific, is that prohibitingonline campaigning will helpthe CRO monitor and punishviolations of campaigningrules, including that pro-hibiting slander againstone’s opponents. An obvi-ous practical flaw in this ar-gument is that if a violationoccurring on the internet,for example in an email notreceived by the CRO, is notreported, it will not be pun-ished. Thus the ban, whilelimiting the freedom of ex-pression of those candidateswilling to play by the rulesdoes not do much to stopthose willing to flout them.On a more philosophicalnote, I am deeply troubledby the presumption, implicitin the ban supporters’ argu-ment, that online campaign-ing will be used for illegalpurposes often enough tojustify its complete prohibi-tion. Good faith, I thought,was presumed in Quebec –and this presumption shouldbe all the stronger in ourcollegial and friendly faculty!

A final argument made insupport of the ban is that itis necessary to ensure thefairness of LSA elections. Itis said that the prohibitionof online campaigning willprevent candidates fromgaining an undue advantagefrom spending substantialamounts of time and moneyon campaigning, including

THE LSA’S FREESPEECH PROBLEMby Leonid Sirota (LAW III)

16

QUID NOVI

Wednesday, March 12, 2008 12:30-2:30pm

Faculty of Law, McGill University3644 Peel Street

Room 100 NCDH (Moot Court)

Dealing With Wrongful ConvictionsSpeakers’ Series

Please Join Us

Speakers:

Joyce MilgaardMother of wrongfully

convictedDavid Milgaard

Alan YoungDirector

Osgoode Hall Law SchoolInnocence Project

Olga AkselrodStaff Attorney

New York Innocence Project

What Is Innocence McGill?

Innocence McGill is a student-led endeavour centered at the Faculty of Law of McGill University. It is run under the supervision of faculty

members and prominent criminal lawyers, and is dedicated to researching and investigating claims of wrongful conviction in the province of

Quebec. Our ultimate goal is to help secure the freedom of those who are factually innocent of serious crimes for which they continue to serve

sentences in Quebec prisons.For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at

www.mcgill.ca/innocence/.

Dealing

ith WWith Dealing

ongful ConvictionsrW

ongful Convictions

ongful Convictions

ednesdayWWednesday

Faculty of Law

Dealing Please Join Us

, March 12, 2008ednesday 12:30-2:30pm

, McGill University Faculty of Law Faculty of Law, McGill University

ongful Convictionss eireS’srekaakepS

Please Join Us

, March 12, 2008

, McGill University

Please Join Us

Joyce Milgaard

Faculty of Law

Room 100 NCDH (Moot Court)

Joyce Milgaard

, McGill University Faculty of Law Faculty of Law, McGill University3644 Peel Street

Room 100 NCDH (Moot Court)

Speakers:Speakers:

oungYYoungAlan

, McGill University

Room 100 NCDH (Moot Court)

AkselrOlga

odAkselr

Joyce MilgaardMother of wr

convictedDavid Milgaard

Joyce Milgaardongfully Mother of wr

convictedDavid Milgaard

Osgoode Hall Law School

What Is Innocence McGill?

oungYYoungAlan ectorDirDirector

Osgoode Hall Law SchoolInnocence Project

What Is Innocence McGill?

Osgoode Hall Law School

AkselrOlga AttorneyStaff

ork Innocence YYork Innocence New Project

What Is Innocence McGill?

odAkselrAttorney

ork Innocence Project

members and prominent criminal lawyers, and is dedicated to researching

are factually innocent of serious crimes for which they continue to serve

For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at

Innocence McGill is a student-led endeavour centered at the Faculty of Law of McGill University

members and prominent criminal lawyers, and is dedicated to researching and investigating claims of wrongful conviction in the province of

Quebec. Our ultimate goal is to help secure the freedom of those who are factually innocent of serious crimes for which they continue to serve

sentences in Quebec prisons.For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at

Innocence McGill is a student-led endeavour centered at the Faculty . It is run under the supervision of faculty of Law of McGill University

members and prominent criminal lawyers, and is dedicated to researching and investigating claims of wrongful conviction in the province of

Quebec. Our ultimate goal is to help secure the freedom of those who are factually innocent of serious crimes for which they continue to serve

sentences in Quebec prisons.For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at

Innocence McGill is a student-led endeavour centered at the Faculty . It is run under the supervision of faculty

members and prominent criminal lawyers, and is dedicated to researching and investigating claims of wrongful conviction in the province of

Quebec. Our ultimate goal is to help secure the freedom of those who are factually innocent of serious crimes for which they continue to serve

sentences in Quebec prisons.For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at

members and prominent criminal lawyers, and is dedicated to researching

are factually innocent of serious crimes for which they continue to serve

For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at

For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at www

For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at .mcgill.ca/innocence.mcgill.ca/innocencewwwwww.mcgill.ca/innocence

For more information on Innocence McGill, please visit our website at .mcgill.ca/innocence.mcgill.ca/innocence//. .mcgill.ca/innocence . /

17

11 MARS 2008

RECIPES FOR WELL-BEING COOKBOOK

The Student Well-Being Committee will be publishing its second annual Cookbook intime for exams. But we can’t do it without your help!

Please submit your favourite recipes to wellbeing.mcgill@gmail.com. We are lookingfor dishes that are healthy, fast, easy or comforting.

Students can access last year’s cookbook, “Healthy recipes for Busy Times,” at thefollowing website: www.mcgill.ca/files/law-studies/Well-being_Cookbook.pdf.

Do you have questions? Please contact Natalie Haras or Aryana Rousseau.

wellbeing.mcgill@gmail.com

building sophisticated web-sites to promote their candi-dacies. With all due respectto the ban’s supporters, Ibelieve they are tilting atwindmills. I find it hard tobelieve that many law stu-dents would be swayed bythe fanciness of a websiterather than by a candidate’splatform – if, that is, candi-dates are given the chanceto articulate their platforms.I also find it hard to believethat many candidates wouldbother investing dispropor-tionate amounts of time,much less money, into cam-paigning. The likely instru-ments of an onlinecampaign, such as a Face-book group or a few emailsare free and require notmore than a few minutes ofwork. If a candidate is not

willing to take those fewminutes, he or she is not fitfor a job that requires manyhours of work every week.Finally, I question the veryassumption that candidateswho are willing, despite theunlikelihood of it influencingthe election’s outcome, tospend their time and moneyon websites are engaging ina practice so unfair it mustbe prohibited. If candidateswant to spend money onfancy posters, the by-lawsdo not prevent them fromdoing it. If they want to skipclass in order to talk tomore prospective voters,they are free to do it. Howis campaigning online moreunfair?

The arguments in favour ofthe ban on online cam-

paigning are unconvincing.They either assume worst-case scenarios in which can-didates will be acting in badfaith if not maliciously, orare based on entirely artifi-cial distinctions between on-line and conventionalcampaigning. In fact, I won-der whether the real moti-vation of at least some ofthe ban’s supporters is not avisceral hostility to the free-dom promised by the inter-net. “You cannot just haveno rules at all,” I was told.Fair enough. Which is whysubs. 3.2 of By-Law 9 pro-vides that “[c]andidates willconduct a fair campaignthat respects their oppo-nents. This includes, but isnot limited to, refrainingfrom interfering with thedistribution of campaign

material and engaging inslanderous campaigning.”Unfair, disrespectful or slan-derous campaigning is al-ready prohibited. What’s thepoint of restricting themeans to campaign fairly?

It is, I am afraid, too latenow to organize a referen-dum to change the by-lawsin time for the upcomingelections. However, if youcare about freedom of ex-pression within the LSA, youmight want to ask the can-didates where they stand onthis issue. While it shouldnot be the only one onwhich you base yourchoices, it is, I believe, a le-gitimate and indeed a fairlyserious one, which youshould consider.

18

QUID NOVI

Cambodia used to be inthe news every day.Southeast Asian com-

munism combined with thecivil war and genocide en-sured that Cambodia gotplenty of attention from theWest in the 1970s and1980s. Yet these days, asidefrom periodic updates onthe Khmer Rouge tribunals,Cambodia is not on ourminds.

Not that it shouldn’t be onour minds, particularly forus law students. Cambodiais an extreme case study inthe failure of the rule of lawin a post-conflict nation.Since the 1991 Paris PeaceAgreement, which broughtan end to the civil war, Pres-ident Hun Sen’s governmenthas become a highly suc-cessful “kleptocracy” inwhich institutionalized cor-ruption, human rightsabuses, and impunity is nor-mal and accepted. The cor-rupted behavior ofhigher-ups in the govern-ment has a trickle-down ef-fect such that the lowliestcivil servants expect bribestoo. I even had to slip a“donation” to the clerk atthe Ministry of Transporta-tion to get my driver’s li-cense.

But let me focus this discus-sion more in a way that hasspecial resonance for us:the court system is hope-lessly compromised by cor-ruption and totalmanipulation of the law.Judges yell at defendantsand intimidate witnesses.

They regularly accept bribesfrom the party with thehighest offer. They preventdefense counsel from cross-examining the prosecution’switnesses. They answertheir cell phones in the mid-dle of court proceedings.They allow clearly fabricated

documents to be enteredinto evidence. And perhapsmost baffling of all, manyjudges don’t even have aproper legal education.

The legal profession, too, isalso hopelessly compro-mised in its own way. Re-cently, the Cambodian BarAssociation, a statutorily en-abled regulatory body, hassubtly intimidated lawyers

working at local NGOs. Ithas stated that NGOs em-ploying lawyers must sign amemorandum of under-standing with the Bar, thusgiving it a measure of defacto control over lawyers’terms of employment. TheBar’s representatives have

pri-

vately threatened lawyerswho work at NGOs on politi-cally sensitive cases that ex-pose government corruptionor human rights abuses. Fi-nally, one of the Bar’s mem-bers is President Hun Senhimself—even though hehas no more than an ele-mentary school education,let alone a law degree. ForCambodian law studentsand lawyers, then, employ-ment in the NGO sector can

be a risky proposition.Working on sensitive publicinterest issues that may im-plicate government officialscarries a threat of sanctionfrom the Bar or even possi-ble disbarment.

From this perspective, Cam-bodia should be in thenews, or at least it ought tobe on our minds. As lawstudents, we know thatwhile our own justice sys-tem has its own set of prob-lems, it is largelycorruption-free. We canwork where we want to,and we can select the is-sues on which we want towork. We know that theCanadian Bar Associationhas our profession’s best in-terests in mind and that ithas a standardized processfor sanction in the event oflawyerly misconduct. Andwe know that our govern-ment will usually obey therule of law. The situation inCambodia throws our ownlegal system into relief andreminds us of how law is—or is not—respected else-where in the world.

LAW IN CAMBODIA: GETTING IT ON OUR

MINDS

by Dustin Milligan (LAW II)

19

MARCH 11, 2008

QUID NOVI