NEWS
20 Obiter Dicta
Election
Ghomeshi
Kunduz
» continued from cover
» continued from page 3
» continued from page 4
The Conservatives lost only -0.97 percent of their 2011
vote total, while the NDP lost -27.85 percent of their
voters, and the Liberals saw a stunning 59.66 percent
increase in support. The Bloc Quebecois get the award
for oddest election result, as their 80,000 fewer votes
somehow landed them an increase from four seats in
the House of Commons to ten. Elizabeth May kept her
seat, winning her riding in the Saanich-Gulf Islands.
The results show that the Liberals have recaptured
the bulk of left-leaning Canadians, and the attention
of undecided voters. Thanks to our, hopefully soon
to change, electoral system, the Liberals rode the
win to 87 seat gains from the Conservatives, 56 from
the NDP, and 1 from the BQ. With 184 total seats as
compared to the Conservatives’ 99, the NDP’s 44, the
BQ’s 10, and the Green’s 1, the Liberals are poised to
form a powerful majority government.
Of that new government, Canada will see a marginal
change in the number of women representatives, up
from 76 to 88. LGBTQ Representation and Rights, a
research group in the United States, counts 6 LGBTQ
and out candidates who won their riding, the same
number as the three previous elections. 10 indigenous
candidates were also elected, representing an increase
over the 7 who won in 2011.
With the election behind us, our attention now
turns to ensuring accountability and productivity
from our new government. Trudeau has made
significant promises regarding electoral and senate
reform, criminal reform, new approaches to
immigration and indigenous rights, and changes to
tax and CPP rates. These plans could have positive or
detrimental effects on the country, and it will be the
responsibility of all Canadians to monitor and respond
to the changes as appropriate.
Our other responsibility will be in bringing to the
forefront less “fashionable” public concerns. Trudeau
plans to stop bombing campaigns in Syria, but the
US has already shown how ineffective “training
missions” can be, and Trudeau is formulating similar
plans. Climate change is back in the Canadian psyche,
but efforts will mean little in the face of increased oil
drilling (Shell starts exploratory drilling this week off
the east coast) and a lack of international cooperation.
Canada’s tax system remains grossly skewed in favour
of the wealthy regardless of proposed changes, and
individual rights to housing and food remain distant
dreams.
Further, though many prefer to ignore the
impending reality, our evolving economy is also
on the verge of permanently changing the country.
Automation and globalization are combining to craft a
new labour market, for which our politicians will have
no choice but to respond. Income inequality is hitting
a crux, and poverty is increasingly driving migration,
crime, and civil unrest across and over international
borders.
The times, they are a’ changin,’ and it’s anyone’s
guess how far things will go during our next
government’s tenure. Fortunately, by showing the
power of our voices in this election, Canadians
have positioned themselves well to address future
challenges, and seize opportunities. For Justin
Trudeau, the opportunity is now, and with a majority
government, and the confidence of Canadians behind
him, substantial progress is hopefully just around the
corner. u
to their clients but also to the court, the profession,
and the public writ large. Moreover, the Rules also
emphasize a commitment to the principles of equality.
Any frivolous motions, therefore, are not only
unprofessional and unethical—not to mention morally
problematic—but any reliance on evidence elicited
because of them also amounts to an error of law.
It is possible, and quite likely, that Heinen sought
the production of complainants’ therapeutic records
and/or the admission of their prior sexual history
with Ghomeshi (and perhaps even people other than
Ghomeshi). She may have suggested that there is
likely to be evidence in the therapeutic records that
the complainants are just jilted exes or that their
sexual histories may include evidence that they had
communicated their consent in a similar manner
on previous occasions where BDSM was part of the
sexual encounter. Unless she can prove probity and
relevance, this evidence should not be admitted.
1 February 2016 is just around the corner, so we will
soon learn whether Heinen took her own advice. ◆
to characterize it as anything other than a “difficult
situation,” and stated that an investigation would
have to be concluded before anything else could be
said.
Lee, unsatisfied, compared the Kunduz bombing
to a 2014 attack by Israeli forces on a UN school
in Gaza, despite being aware that it was a school.
American leaders had been swift to decry the violence
as “disgraceful” and “appalling” without waiting for
an investigation. “Can you say now,” Lee pressed,
“that this shelling of this hospital was disgraceful and
appalling?”
The double standards of “just” military
engagement—while unacceptable according to
the rule of law—are fundamental to the realities of
international politics.
Though theoretically any nation may be
accused of a war crime, Macdonald points out that
the five permanent members of the UN Security
Council have veto power, which effectively prevents
American war crimes from being referred to the
International Criminal Court.
What would it mean for the rule of law and
respect for international process if the US were to
reject the inquiry? It depends—and certainly if the
US completes its own investigation with adequate
transparency, public opinion in the States might
not rise to the level to insist that their government
comply with the IHFFC.
In areas of international military conflict, the
demands of the rule of law compete with the realities
of geopolitical power. Perceptions of the moral
righteousness of states’ actions persist even in the
absence of obedience to internationally agreed-upon
processes.
The investigation of war crimes are at least as
implicated in geopolitics as in law, and the facts of
the Kunduz airstrike are not in dispute–the only
contested element is its justification. ◆
Mental health
» continued from page 7
addressing this issue. These include: strengthening
global governance for mental health by ensuring
that eighty percent of countries have developed their
mental healt h policies to reflect international human
rights instruments, and providing responsive mental
health and social care services for communities
by increasing coverage by twenty percent. The
suggestions are broad and are meant to capture
global goals for mental health. As such, countries
are expected to apply these goals to their country’s
particular health needs.
Another important consideration when
implementing indicators is the aggregation of data.
That is, when a country reports its health outcomes,
the data often reviews the country as a whole without
considering the health outcomes of particular
communities. Aggregate data can unintentionally
mask significant health inequalities between
populations. A population as a whole might see
great improvements in mental health coverage, but
vulnerable communities might still face significant
barriers to these services. Requiring particular
methods of reporting that include researching the
health outcomes of vulnerable populations has been
suggested by a number of different global health and
international development researchers.
There is little controversy when it comes to
including issues of mental health into the SDGs.
However, given the ambiguity of SDG 3.4 and the
issues of generating particular health indicators for
mental health, creating policies on how domestic
policy can include and report on these goals is difficult.
Time will tell if mental health will be meaningfully
addressed, or if it is simply a well-meaning addition
to the SDGs. ◆
Health check-up
» continued from page 6
the Halton clinic, the three clinics recognize that
innovation necessitates an adaptation of the project
to their respective communities and needs. The key is
not the LHC tool, but rather the conversation that the
tool initiates between intermediaries and clients.
The expansion to the three neighbouring clinics
promises an important new step in the continuing
learning process. HCLS will also continue to develop
and refine their model. The Guelph, Brant, and
Hamilton legal aid clinics will undoubtedly develop a
wealth of knowledge as they explore legal needs and
community capacity in the three different locations.
The exchange of information and the lessons learned
among the four legal aid clinics will add an important
dimension to the development of the intermediary
partnership/legal health check-up approach and
expanding access to justice.
Read Dr. Albert Currie’s full report on the Pilot
Phase of the Legal Health Check-Up Project at:
legalhealthcheckup.ca.
This is a revised version of an article by Ab Currie,
Ph.D. Senior Research Fellow Canadian Forum on
Civil Justice ◆