Canadian Law Research Articles

Indigenous rights in the context of oil and gas pipelines in Canada: exposing naturalised power structures through a lens of intersectionality

AbstractSituated within the larger context of Canadian pipeline decisions, it is argued that pipeline proposals in a geography without pre-existing pipelines are unsuccessful in contrast to proposals repurposing and expanding existing pipelines. The Chippewas of the Thames (the ‘Chippewas’) unsuccessfully opposed Enbridge's expansion, reversal and repurposing to crude oil of the Line 9 pipeline in Ontario, Canada. Analysing the Chippewas’ case within the context of recent oil- and gas-pipeline developments, using a lens of intersectionality focused on identity markers of indigeneity, socio-economic status and geographical location, exposes the naturalised power structures of Canadian law. These structures include the legal institutions of real-property law, Crown ownership of wildlife and fish, implicit ‘standing’ of the economy and assimilation of indigenous rights. Exposing this dichotomy of indigenous rights on paper vs. in practice deepens the consideration of indigenous rights, potentially allowing intersecting oppressions to be addressed.

The <i>Vavilov</i> Framework and the Future of Canadian Administrative Law

This paper is the first comprehensive analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Vavilov v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 SCC 65. Here, the Supreme Court rewrote its administrative law jurisprudence, aiming to bring clarity and coherence to an area of Canadian law long plagued by uncertainty. I commend the Supreme Court's effort to comprehensively address the issues raised over the last decade by judges, practitioners and scholars but I note that the coalition assembled in Vavilov could fracture in future cases, when the Vavilov framework is sure to come under pressure. In this paper, I lay out the Vavilov framework, describing in Parts I and II the new approaches to selecting the standard of review and to applying the reasonableness standard, before moving on in Part III to discuss how past precedents can be retrofitted to the Vavilov framework, and turning in Part IV to the role to be played by remedial discretion. Underlying my analysis of the Vavilov framework, with its various strengths and weaknesses is a simple question: will the consensus hold? On both selecting the standard of review and applying the reasonableness standard, the majority reasons raise a number of issues, provoke several tensions and create multiple sources of pressure. In future cases, these will have to be addressed. Then, the consensus will be put to the test. In Vavilov, seven judges (on selecting the standard of review) and nine judges (on applying the standard of review) were of one mind. But their ideological preferences may cause them to diverge in cases to come and the same may prove true of lower court judges.

Simplifying the Complexities of Negligence Law - A Joint Academic/Judicial Proposal

Over a century, Common Law judges, academics, and practitioners have struggled with the complexities of negligence law. All agree that negligence liability is imposed on a defendant whose unreasonable conduct caused foreseeable harm to the plaintiff, and who owed a duty of care to the plaintiff. But views differ considerably as to the meaning and role of each element (conduct, harm causation, duty), the test, and the relevant considerations that should be applied to each, the interrelation between these elements, and the meaning and role of the foreseeability requirement in each element. Against this background, the author has argued for years that the above complexities can be easily solved by a simplified model of negligence. Recently the author’s model has been embraced by Israeli Justices and judges. The article presents the proposed model, explains how it solves the described complexities, and fends off criticism. It then demonstrates the model’s operation by applying it to the 2018 CSS’s decision in the Rankin case. A glimpse at the Third Restatement on Torts shows that it steers in the same direction, as evidenced by an analysis of the Palsgraf case and the unforeseeable plaintiff question. Following a short overview of leading British cases from Donoghue to the 2018 decision in Robinson, it is argued that a shift to the proposed model would be a natural evolution that can be easily achieved. In contrast, it is argued that Canadian law has moved in another direction, for incorrect reasons. The model is then compared with another reform recently suggested in the literature. Finally, fault-based liability in continental Europe is viewed from the perspective of the proposed model.

Twisted into knots: Canada’s challenges in lawful access to encrypted communications

This article addresses the Canadian law governing ‘lawful access’ to potentially encrypted data-in-motion; that is, communications done through electronic means. This article begins by outlining the core agencies responsible for counterterrorism investigations in Canada, and the recent public debate and government consultation on encryption. Next, we identify how older laws designed for a different era may be leveraged to force service and platform providers to assist law enforcement and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service by decrypting communications and data. We will also touch on the legal capacity of these organizations to develop their own ‘workarounds’, including the role of Canada’s signals intelligence agency, the Communications Security Establishment. Throughout, we highlight how Canada’s long-standing ‘intelligence to evidence’ problem affects and, arguably exacerbates, the encryption-prompted ‘going dark’ phenomenon and consequently impairs Canadian counterterrorism efforts. We predict legal reform resolving the ‘going dark’ issue will be impossible without modernization of Canada’s disclosure regime.

Twisted Into Knots: Canada’s Challenges in Lawful Access to Encrypted Communications

In 2016, Apple vs FBI case animated “going dark” (communications encryption) debate in United States. The Court battle between tech giant and most powerful law enforcement agency in world stemmed from a mass shooting in December 2015, that left 14 people dead. Meanwhile, as American agents worked to unlock shooter’s phone, prosecutors in Canada were seeking to convict seven men linked to Montreal mafia for 2011 abduction and murder of Sal the Ironworker Montagna, a member of New York’s Bonanno crime family. The evidence of men’s conspiracy consisted almost entirely of intercepted emails, chats, and encrypted BlackBerry Pin to Pin messages. Publicly divulging key would effectively render every BlackBerry user vulnerable to interception and endanger ongoing police investigations across country, if not world. Predictably, Crown dropped murder charges and accused plead guilty to significantly lesser offence of conspiracy to commit murder. Over next two years, Crown would stay charges against dozens of other men rounded up in same operation targeting Montreal organized crime; encryption key was never disclosed. In this manner, Mirarchi case encapsulates a quintessentially Canadian element of “going dark” debate: intelligence-to-evidence dilemma, and specifically, risk that sensitive technical means and methods may be disclosed in open court under Canada’s broad criminal trial disclosure rules. This article addresses Canadian law governing “lawful access” to potentially encrypted data-in-motion; that is, communications done through electronic means. This article begins by outlining core agencies responsible for counter-terrorism investigations in Canada, and recent public debate and government consultation on encryption. Next, we identify how older laws designed for a different era may be leveraged to force service and platform providers to assist law enforcement and Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) by decrypting communications and data. We will also touch on legal capacity of these organizations to develop their own “workarounds,” including role of Canada’s signal’s intelligence agency, Communications Security Establishment (CSE). Throughout, we will highlight how Canada’s longstanding intelligence to evidence problem effects and, arguably exacerbates, going dark phenomenon and consequently impairs Canadian counter-terrorism efforts. We predict legal reform resolving “going dark” issue will be impossible without modernization of Canada’s disclosure regime.

Simplifying the Complexities of Negligence Law – A Joint Academic/Judicial Proposal

AbstractOver a century, common law judges, academics, and practitioners have struggled with the complexities of negligence law. All agree that negligence liability is imposed on a defendant whose unreasonable conduct caused foreseeable harm to the plaintiff, and who owed a duty of care to the plaintiff. But views differ considerably as to the meaning and role of each element (unreasonable conduct, harm causation, duty), the test and the relevant considerations that should be applied to each, the interrelation between these elements, and the meaning and role of the foreseeability requirement in each element. Against this background, the author has argued for years that the above complexities can be easily solved by a simplified model of negligence. Recently the author’s model has been embraced by Israeli justices and judges. The article presents the proposed model, explains how it solves the described complexities, and fends off criticism. It then demonstrates the model’s operation by applying it to the 2018 SCC’s decision in the Rankin case. A glimpse at the Third Restatement on Torts shows that it steers in the same direction, as evidenced by an analysis of the Palsgraf case and the unforeseeable plaintiff question. Following a short overview of leading British cases from Donoghue to the 2018 decision in Robinson, it is argued that a shift to the proposed model would be a natural evolution that can be easily achieved. In contrast, it is argued that Canadian law has moved in another direction, for incorrect reasons. The model is then compared with another reform recently suggested in the literature. Finally, fault-based liability in continental Europe is viewed from the perspective of the proposed model.

The Law and Ethics of Switching from Biologic to Biosimilar in Canada.

Governments and financial institutions in several jurisdictions are planning or implementing nonmedical/‘forced’ switches by cutting drug coverage for reference biologics and funding only less expensive biosimilars. Switches raise numerous ethical and legal challenges, as the drugs are framed as not being identical and, despite strong evidence for noninferiority of some biosimilars, there is controversy over whether switching can sometimes lead to adverse events. Canadian law generally requires physicians to give precedence to their patients’ best interests over social interests such as cost containment. The primacy of patients’ interests is also clearly reflected in professional policies and codes of ethics. Moreover, physicians are obligated to disclose everything a reasonable person in the patient’s position would want to know when obtaining informed consent for treatment, including addressing not only scientific information but also relevant social controversy about nonmedical switches. Under Canadian law, physicians may be obligated to tell patients about the ability to access unfunded biologics, even if patients lack the resources to obtain them. In sum, while there is no inherent right to funding for reference biologics in Canada, physicians in some circumstances may have a legal obligation as fiduciaries to advocate on behalf of patients to remain on a reference biologic. At a minimum, the controversy surrounding switching will necessitate, as part of the consent process, a robust and thorough disclosure of relevant risks, benefits and reasonable alternatives.

Unsettling Anthropocentric Legal Systems: Reconciliation, Indigenous Laws, and Animal Personhood

ABSTRACTThis paper argues that interspecies justice is integral to rising decolonizing nationalist ‘reconciliation’ efforts in Canada and that such an interspecies perspective on reconciliation carries a significant promise for developing a new legal subjectivity for animals in settler colonial law to change the conditions of the lives of animals materially. I demonstrate that the personhood ascribed to animals in numerous Indigenous legal orders in Canada, as well as underlying non-anthropocentric worldviews where animals are not considered inferior to humans but are to be regarded as kin, should stimulate a new legal conversation in Canadian law about who/what animals are and the legal subjectivity and regard they merit among all those committed to reconciliation. Indigenous legal orders offer animal advocates a new and potentially transformative legal argument as to why the continued legal classification of animals as a property in Canadian law is exploitative and incompatible with a dominant legal order seeking to foster genuine reconciliation. Notwithstanding the residual anthropocentric elements of Indigenous worldviews promoting ‘respectful’ or ‘reciprocal’ relations with animals, and how such elements might be co-opted by settler society, this new reconciliation-originating animal-friendly argument has the potential, if adopted, to alter the material conditions of lives of many animals, most notably in intensive agriculture.

Domestic Contracts and Family Law Exceptionalism: An Historical Perspective

Since at least the late 1980s, the enforceability of domestic contracts in Canadian common law has tended to be analyzed in terms of a formal equality/substantive fairness dichotomy. This paper suggests that our understanding of the common law of domestic contracts in Canada can be enriched by adding an historical lens to existing analyses. Specifically, the paper argues that the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in the Pelech v. Pelech trilogy was not only an attempt to inject the ideology of contract into family law, but also amounted to a continuation of long-standing approaches to separation agreements in English and Canadian law—an approach that rendered the treatment of separation agreements and the result in Pelech historical outliers when considered against broader exceptionalizing trends in judicial and scholarly approaches to agreements touching upon the family. From this perspective, the retreat from Pelech in the subsequent Supreme Court of Canada cases of Miglin v. Miglin, Hartshorne v. Hartshorne, and Rick v. Brandsema was, therefore, also a move away from the historically distinctive approach to separation agreements, and the continuation of much older processes of exceptionalism within family law.

Lines Drawn in Blood: A Comparative Perspective on the Accommodation of Blended Families in Succession Law

Blended families, created by the coupling of individuals with children who are not common to both spouses, are not new to Canadian society. Yet, Canadian legal systems still struggle to find ways of accounting for their specificities in various legal regimes. This article focuses on the way laws on inheritance treat blended families: whether a stepchild can inherit, upon intestacy, from the father they grew up with if he is not listed on their birth certificate; whether, as intended, the child of one of the spouses really receives their parent’s full estate if this parent predeceases their spouse; whether an intestate’s younger “half-sister” receives as much as an estranged older sibling. I take a comparative approach to these questions, critically analyzing laws across Canada, France, England, and Scotland to discuss the strengths and shortcomings of various legislative approaches. My findings indicate that while blended families create new relationships that are inexistent in the nuclear family, the template for succession laws across the world remains the nuclear family. Yet, even the simple parental relationship, when placed in the unique framework of a blended family, functions differently in this context and can lead to the rerouting of a deceased’s inheritance. This in-depth look at the interplay of blended families and contemporary succession laws, their origins, and purposes allows me to evaluate whether Canadian laws are accomplishing their goals when it comes to blended families. I find that our laws on inheritance often fail to accommodate the specificity of blended families, and suggest a reframing of the way we approach inheritance so as to foster their inclusion.

Four Unruly Women: Stories of Incarceration and Resistance from Canada's Most Notorious Prison by Ted McCoy

Reviewed by: Four Unruly Women: Stories of Incarceration and Resistance from Canada's Most Notorious Prison by Ted McCoy Nathalie Rech Ted McCoy, Four Unruly Women: Stories of Incarceration and Resistance from Canada's Most Notorious Prison (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press 2019) Ted McCoy's Four Unruly Women sheds light on some of the darkest moments of Kingston Penitentiary through the stories of four women incarcerated during the 19th and 20th centuries. Adopting a critical legal studies approach and a feminist framework, he invites us to look at the prison in a broader social context in order to understand how patriarchy shaped both Canadian law and penology in response to crime, gender, and marginality. McCoy draws a gloomy picture of the everyday life at the penitentiary for the inmate population over the period from 1835 to 1935, using penitentiary records as his main source. The originality of his work stems from disciplinary reports produced by the administration on inmate infractions and the punishments inflicted to unruly prisoners, a source that contrasts with the dryness of usual penitentiary records and offers insight into human relationships inside. Bridget Donnelly, Charlotte Reveille, Kate Slattery, and Emily Boyle (pseudonym) are the four women McCoy chose to support his story. As the author warns us, these might be exceptional cases, but they illustrate what every woman incarcerated at Kingston could potentially face during their incarceration: corporal punishment, physical restraint, solitary confinement, a bread and water diet, and sexual violence. McCoy's biographical approach to these four lives also informs us about the development of the Canadian penitentiary system in relation to the development of industrial capitalism, and the elitist anxiety towards the workingclass. McCoy's book shows the extent to which patriarchy and paternalism were central to Canadian society and to the microcosm of the prison. McCoy's effort to draw the portrait of the central figure of the matron is another of his original contributions to the understanding of women's carceral environments. He shows unambiguously that far from embodying the maternal and caring ideal presented by reformers and penologists alike, she rarely protected women from prison abuses, including sexual abuses from male staff or other forms of torture. The matron was the women prisoners' [End Page 198] favourite target for insults and a plethora of other ruses, not only because she worked the closest with them but also because she was resented for her authority, being the one, more often than not, who denounced their misbehaviours and called for punishment. McCoy's most interesting contribution is undoubtedly the four biographies he presents in four successive chapters. At the centre of his storytelling lies their resistance and the acknowledgement they are, as Jackie Wang wrote, "subjects worthy of having a story of their own." Bridget Donnelly's entire adult life in and out prison exemplifies how poverty and incarceration were deeply intertwined, especially for immigrants to Canada during the 19th century. Her repeated stays at Kingston (and in local jails) for a variety of petty crimes mirror her continuing efforts to survive in times of dire needs. With Charlotte Reveille's story, McCoy explores issues of physical and mental health in confinement and how the carceral institution contributed to making individuals more vulnerable. In this chapter, McCoy exposes the complex figure of the prison surgeon and gives a glimpse on the medical experimentations to which prisoners were subject. McCoy highlights 19th-century debates in the medical field, especially when it came to "insanity" and shows how unscrupulous scientists used the penitentiary as a playing field in their dealings with individuals remote from public view and compassion. Kate Slattery, an Irish immigrant like Donnelly and the third "incorrigible" character presented in the book, is another example of a petty criminal. Her repetitive disruptive behaviours at Kingston—shouting, insulting, and attacking other prisoners—were met with inhumane treatment, justified by the labels that prison officials imposed on her. Incarcerated at the end of the 19th century when recidivism became associated with a "criminological type" and coupled with the penitentiary abandoning the possibility of reformation, she was deemed incorrigible. Moreover, when her confinement ended, she was deported to Ireland at the...

APPROPRIATION OF PERSONALITY IN THE COMMONWEALTH CARIBBEAN

There is the flagrant unauthorized use of people’s personality in the Commonwealth Caribbean, yet the tort of appropriation of personality is grossly underutilized in the region. The Author aimed at ascertaining the reason this situation persists in the Commonwealth Caribbean. The contribution to the introduction and development of appropriation of personality in the Commonwealth Caribbean made by the judgment of the only case on appropriation of personality in the region, Robert Nesta Marley Foundation v Dino Mitchelle Ltd was also discussed. The only other case on appropriation of personlity from the region Georgia Messam v Clive Morris and Milton Williams was also discussed. Traditionally, the development of the law in the Commonwealth Caribbean was along the lines of passing off based on United Kingdom jurisprudence. Recently the development of the tort has been along the lines of Canadian law. It is suggested that the tort should be developed along the lines of both Canadian and German jurisprudence. Resultantly, amendments to the law based on both Canadian and German laws were suggested.

Rights of Nature Legislation for British Columbia: Issues and Options

This paper explores how the rights of nature could be protected through legislation in British Columbia (BC). Canada is far behind other countries in protecting rights of nature. Canadian law does not currently recognize the rights of nature in any meaningful way. Numerous statutes in Canada make nature—from fisheries to wildlife, to the land itself—the exclusive property of humans, with no inherent right to exist, flourish or be restored. We explore two potential avenues for protecting the rights of nature in British Columbia: 1) amendment of existing legislation, and 2) a new stand-alone rights of nature statute. We examine trailblazing rights of nature laws in other jurisdictions to identify key elements of a rights of nature law for BC. This paper presents a preliminary annotated draft of a possible rights of nature statute, not as a proposed model law but as a starting point for discussion.

THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF WARRANTLESS SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATIO

This research will thus consider whether or not section 22 of CPA is inconsistent with the spirit, purport and object of the Constitution. To provide a brief overview of this paper; the introduction will illuminate the aim of the research followed by an examination of what constitutes ‘search’ and ‘seizure’ in terms of CPA. The paper will thereafter consider the existing jurisprudence on search and seizure operations and elucidate the manner in which search and seizure operations affect certain rights in the Bill of Rights. An examination of search and seizure operations under Canadian law will be conducted with the paper culminating in a conclusion containing recommendations regarding the enforcement of search and seizure operations.

A case study in competing methane regulations: Will Canada’s and Alberta’s contrasting regulations achieve equivalent reductions?

The Canadian federal government and the Province of Alberta (the dominant oil and gas producing province) have released competing methane regulations for the oil and gas sector intended to take effect between January 2020–2023. Provisions in Canadian law could allow the provincial regulations to take precedent, but only if they are deemed to be equivalent in effect. This paper presents a comprehensive technical comparison of these upcoming regulations by considering potential site-by-site mitigation impacts on active oil and gas facilities in Alberta in 2018. This analysis was made possible by first creating a detailed inventory using recent pneumatic device count data and current production and activity data, which allowed detailed site-level calculations of regulatory impacts on a monthly basis as required by the regulations. The federal regulations are found to be stronger, achieving ~26% more methane mitigation at full implementation. Key differences are in limits on pneumatic pump emissions, vented emissions, and expected reductions in fugitive emissions through leak detection and repair surveys. The full analysis was repeated using production and inventory data for 2012 and 2017 to examine sensitivities to changing production patterns and facilitate comparisons to the 2012 baseline referenced in federal policy targets for methane reduction. The results were robust in all scenarios. Through a “Potential to Emit” threshold, the federal regulations also impact slightly fewer sites overall by exempting small sites handling limited gas volumes, while achieving greater overall methane reductions. Relative to a 2012 baseline, if fully implemented in 2018 the federal regulations would just reach the bottom of the 40–45% methane reduction target through a combination of past reductions (13%) and additional regulated mitigation (27%). However, recent trends in emissions from mined oil sands operations in particular (which are not affected by these regulations) suggests the 40–45% reduction goal for the overall sector may not be achieved by the 2025 target. Different scenarios to make the regulations equivalent are briefly discussed where the contrast in achieved mitigations for different key sources is important case study data for design of effective and efficient methane regulations.

Case Comment on the Supreme Court Decision in Rankin (Rankin's Garage & Sales v JJ: Foreseeability and Vision

The Supreme Court's 2018 decision in Rankin v JJ is the high court's latest word on the Torts analysis in Canadian law. This case comment suggests that the majority decision of Karakatsanis, J has collapsed the duty of care and remoteness steps. In doing so, the Court may even have rendered discussions of remoteness redundant. The comment is a plea for a more relaxed test for foreseeability in the duty analysis, that is more consistent with the history of the develpment of the duty of care in negligence cases.

Citizen in Exception: Omar Khadr and the Performative Gap in the Law

In May 2015, former Guantanamo Bay detainee Omar Khadr was released from the Bowden Institution in Alberta. Khadr’s return to society followed 14 years of incarceration for an act that he may not have committed, which may not have been a crime, which took place while he was technically a child, and which was judged by a military tribunal that has questionable status in Canadian law. This article argues that Khadr’s long imprisonment was a political decision by US and Canadian authorities that required them to use performativity to suspend the law, depriving Khadr of his rights under American law, the Canadian Charter, and various protocols of international law. This use of performance to undermine law exposes a performative gap in the law: a space in the law that allows it to be moved and shaped by performative acts. Through these acts, Khadr became effectively stateless for a period in time: a citizen-in-exception. Building from Giorgio Agamben’s theory of the state of exception, this paper draws out the role played by performativity in the suspension of law by law. Importantly, the process that led to Khadr’s situation was racially charged from beginning to end. His situation is one manifestation of the way that Muslims have been “cast out” of Western law, as Sherene Razack puts it, since 9/11.

Aboriginal Peoples and the Law: A Critical Introduction by Jim Reynolds

Reviewed by: Aboriginal Peoples and the Law: A Critical Introduction by Jim Reynolds Fumiya Nagai Aboriginal Peoples and the Law: A Critical Introduction. By Jim Reynolds. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2018. ix + 260 pp. Notes, cases cited, index. $29.95, cloth. Beginning with a quote from Harold Cardinal's The Unjust Society (1969), Aboriginal Peoples and the Law explores an answer to whether we have a just society for Aboriginal peoples in Canada today. To this end, Jim Reynolds particularly examines the development and contemporary state of Canadian law relating to Aboriginal peoples, based on his almost 40 years of experiences as a lawyer in the field of Aboriginal law. Because the book is an introduction to modern Aboriginal law, Reynolds avoids using technical legal languages but provides a comprehensive and critical analysis of modern Aboriginal law through extensive resources, including key court decisions, legislation, treaties and agreements, political statements, documents and reports, as well as academic literature. The book consists of eight chapters. In the first and second chapters, Reynolds organizes the conceptual and historical context and background of modern Aboriginal law, including the sources and objectives, as well as the legal definitions of Aboriginal rights in Canada. In the third chapter, as a significant and fundamental [End Page 162] aspect of Aboriginal law, Reynolds particularly clarifies Aboriginal-Crown relations by exploring their legal and historical developments and analyzing key concepts such as fiduciary duties and the honor of the Crown. Subsequently, in chapters 4 and 5, Reynolds examines the legal basis, contents, limits, and historical developments of Aboriginal rights and title, which constitute a major part of modern Aboriginal law, as well as those of Aboriginal peoples' treaty rights. In chapter 6, Reynolds focuses on the possibilities and limitations of the Crown's duties of consultation, accommodation, and consent with Aboriginal peoples, and specifically considers the current approach by courts. In chapter 7, Reynolds further expands his analysis to other bodies of law, especially Indigenous law and international law, which are not a part of but may influence modern Aboriginal law in Canada. In the last chapter, Reynolds summarizes his opinions on current Canadian Aboriginal law, pointing out its limitations and the need for further political will from the governments. By touching on multiple aspects of Aboriginal law in Canada, the book helps readers understand its complexities, including ongoing developments aft er this book was written. As a notable example, in November 2019, British Columbia passed a provincial law to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. As Reynolds points out in his chapter 7, the UN Declaration "contains some potentially far-reaching provisions recognizing the right to self-determination" (187), and this provincial legislation may further promote the protection of Aboriginal rights in Canada. However, as also revealed in this book, the Crown has a long history of using law as an instrument of assimilating and colonizing Aboriginal peoples until today, limiting the scope of Aboriginal rights. Reynolds also concludes that there is "still a long way to go before Canada can claim to be a just society for Aboriginal peoples" (217). Toward this end, I believe that it remains necessary for us to continue to critically examine Canada's developments in Aboriginal law. [End Page 163] Fumiya Nagai Department of Anthropology University of British Columbia Copyright © 2020 Center for Great Plains Studies, University of Nebraska–Lincoln

A study on the differences in legal practices in child abuse cases with examples from different countries

Sex crimes against children is a global problem. The rate of such crimes are significant even societies with high levels of education and income. This study aimed to address necessary measures to minimize this problem by discussing the data and laws regarding sex crimes against children in five countries.The study reviewed scientific data on sex crimes against children in India, Canada, the Netherlands, UK and Turkey and the relevant penal codes in these countries, and compared the respective articles and practices. India is one of the countries with the highest number of child sexual abuse cases. The most interesting aspect of the Canadian law is that the law mentions peer relationships. It is noted that the criminal justice system in the Netherlands is, as opposed to many other countries, based on principles of rehabilitation and resocialization. The longer penalty times are striking in UK Sexual Offences Act 2003.The data from Turkish Statistical Institute shows that the number of sexual abuse cases are extremely high in Turkey.Child sexual abuse is a frequent problem in the world. Unfortunately, related studies, training and legislative regulations are not sufficient to solve this problem. It is observed that abuse cases increase in countries having weak and middle economies; however, the opposite evaluation is not completely correct. It can’t be suggested that standard education programs, increased levels of income and the securing of justice are the only solutions. Sexual abuse training through standard methods are insufficient to prevent this problem. Educational specialists need to develop new educational methods to address the problem. The rehabilitation of child victims is as important as punishment of offenders. This study advocates that necessary steps should be taken for the widespread establishment of Child Protection Centers, which play a significant role in the rehabilitation and treatment of victims.

The Relationship Between Restrictions on the Deduction of Interest Under Canadian Law and Canadian Tax Treaties

The author analyzes the provisions of Canadian tax treaties and those of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and United Nations (UN) model conventions to determine whether they would prevent the application of the restrictions on the deduction of interest under the Canadian Income Tax Act—namely, the thin capitalization rules and rules that deem interest to be dividends. Although the provisions of the model conventions would prevent the application of the Canadian thin capitalization rules, the provisions of Canadian tax treaties have been carefully negotiated to allow the application of those rules. The author also questions whether the provisions of the OECD and UN model conventions should be interpreted to prevent the application of thin capitalization rules, and he concludes that restrictions on the deduction of interest under domestic law should be prevented by the provisions of the model conventions only if those restrictions are discriminatory.