Ultra Vires Vol 20 Iss 4 - January 2019 by Ultra Vires

ULTRAVIRES.CA

JANUARY 30, 2019

VOL. 20, ISS. 4

THE INDEPENDENT STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW

How to Get Ahead @BoraLaskinsHead shares thoughts on law school and life

JAMES FLYNN (1L) was early in the morning. The library was still not open, but Waddams didn’t know it. Head slightly bowed in deep contemplation of the blasphemous error, Waddams was clearly going to hit the closed doors. A law student rushed into his path to stop him, but needed to pretend that the interruption was to ask a question about something concerning public policy in damages awards. The poor student stood there listening until the library opened. Another hero. UV: Legal observers often say you were ahead of your time. How do you feel now that you are a head of our time? BLH: These perspicuous legal observers are certainly correct. But I would prefer not to say that I was ahead of my time. My time was behind me. Now… well, now I am certainly a head (as you note). UV: At times, the legal profession can be challenging. What challenges did you face during your career? How did you overcome them?

@BORALASKINSHEAD (LLB ‘36, LEFT) IS INTERVIEWED BY JAMES FLYNN (1L, RIGHT). PHOTO CREDIT: HONGHU WANG (2L)

Bora Laskin was born in Fort William, Ontario, on October 5, 1912. Laskin earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1933, a Master of Arts in 1935, and a Bachelor of Laws in 1936, all from the University of Toronto. He also received a Master of Laws from Harvard Law School in 1937. Following a long academic career, he was appointed to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1965 and then to the Supreme Court of Canada in 1970, where he served for 14 years. From his perch outside the library bearing his name, Ultra Vires spoke with @BoraLaskinsHead to get his thoughts on law school and life. Ultra Vires (UV): You joined Twitter in April 2015. What prompted you to share your thoughts on that platform? Bora Laskin’s Head (BLH): I wanted the Supreme Court of Canada to join Twitter, so as its leader, I led the way. In July 2015, they followed. Their account claims that they are not “Following” anyone, but it is an implied term that they follow me. We all know that. They “direct message” me a lot of questions. I suppose they think I am still on the payroll. Though flattering, it can irritate. Especially if I am trying to read whatever @UTLaw is superproudly tweeting that day, only to be interrupted with a message from @SCC_eng asking for clari-

fication about law they ought to know. It is all there in my judgments. They just need to read what I wrote and extrapolate. Yet they insist on asking. Not to worry. I will block them shortly. UV: You were born in Fort William, Ontario and finished your career at the pinnacle of Canadian legal life. What are some of the most interesting things you have seen? BLH: Oh, I have seen a lot. But the definition of interesting changes over time. The humorous is always interesting. I once saw [Chief Justice Brian] Dickson criticize his clerk for citing a decision which was “certain to be overruled within four years” and should “only be cited in a memo for the purpose of mocking it.” And then this brave clerk—my hero—gently pointed out that Dickson wrote the majority opinion. It was a wonderful day. Intellectual brilliance is still interesting, which is why I re-read my judgments, but lately I have been eager for the human experience and imaginative sympathy. A small example: Some recent day, [Professor Stephen] Waddams walked past me at a quick pace, mumbling something about an early edition of his contracts textbook omitting some English case from four hundred years ago. It

BLH: I had great difficulty finding an articling position because I was Jewish, despite my stellar academic achievements. And other similar discouraging moments in my life. Any rejection or negative evaluation, whether through applications or grades, is disheartening. But I learned to delicately balance the judgment of others with my own self-assessment and vision. I did not suddenly transform into a Supreme Court Justice on March 19, 1970. The future Justice was in that young law student who loved the law. Who knew? No one. But I sensed something. UV: What advice do you have for U of T Law students looking to get ahead of the curve? BLH: Seek material to satisfy earnest interest. Take courses that you care about. If they are required by the law school or by law firm pressure, at least learn to love something about them—something delightful in the learning process. It’s the same with life. All our lives have elements of the uncontrollable—experiences, people, contexts we did not request. They ask something of us or challenge us to be more. Only the lucky few figure out the great convergence— when the difference between what you ask of life and what life asks of you can’t be told. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity and length. Follow @BoraLaskinsHead on Twitter.

The Demise of the Journal of International Law and International Relations Faculty shuttered JILIR despite student protests after the Munk School pulled support MELODY CHAN (1L) Last year, the Faculty of Law of f icially discontinued the Journal of International Law and International Relations ( JIL IR). A joint publication with the Munk School of Global A f fairs (now the Munk School of Global A f fairs and Public Policy), the journal published 13 volumes in its 14 year run featuring articles from professors, policy-makers, and students about the intersection between the two f ields of research. The decision to cancel, according to Assistant Dean Sara Faherty, was the result of a year-long discussion within the law school after the Munk School decided to end their partnership in 2016. While the faculty deliberated for another year, they eventually concluded that the Munk School had pulled their support for good reasons. Due to a growing volume of research and interest in what was once a niche area, the leadership at both schools reached the decision that there was no longer a need for a space dedicated to debate on topics that were being subsumed into the f ields of law and the rapidly expanding f ield of global af fairs. “The facts made it inevitable to a certain extent,” Faherty said. “Our little journal had a good reputation but people would rather get published in the big journals of both f ields that were now accepting cross-f ield work,” she said. A nne-Rachelle Boulanger (4L J D/ MGA) was one of three Editors-in-Chief in the journal’s f inal year. She and the other editorial staf f learned of the faculty’s decision to end their publication in Februar y 2018, with the reasons above being elaborated upon in a memo that was written with the Munk School in 2017. The journal staf f spent their f inal months closing out the journal, publishing one last issue and turning away submissions and students who continued to express interest Continued on Page 7

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE SLS ON NEW GOV'T POLICIES

RIGHTS REVIEW

ALL ABOUT LAW FOLLIES

PAGE 5

PAGE 11

PAGE 19

2 | January 30, 2019

ultravires.ca

IN THIS ISSUE....

UV INDEX

Happy New Year! May your days be longer and your workloads lighter. 84 Queen’s Park Crescent Toronto, ON M5S 2C5 Ultra Viresis the independent student newspaper of the University of Toronto Faculty of Law. We provide a forum for diverse viewpoints on topics of interest to our readers. We aim to foster dialogue on academic and social issues between students, the faculty, and the broader legal community in Toronto, Ontario, and Canada. Our content does not necessarily ref lect the views of the Editorial Board. Ultra Vires is printed by Master Web Inc.

EDITORS-IN-CHIEF Chloe Magee & Honghu Wang NEWS EDITOR Matthew Prior ASSOCIATE NEWS EDITORS James Flynn & Melody Chan FEATURES EDITOR Daryna Kutsyna ASSOCIATE FEATURES EDITOR Michelle Huang OPINIONS EDITOR SuJung Lee ASSOCIATE OPINIONS EDITOR Alina Yu DIVERSIONS EDITOR Rory Smith ASSOCIATE DIVERSIONS EDITOR Vacant—apply to editor@ultravires.ca

With the ringing in of every new year comes a period of reflection. In this issue, our contributors reflect on wide-ranging topics, from the academic (on exam methods and the recent Wright Lecture by Professor Tushnet) to the social (Valentine’s Day date spots and why you should have a baby in law school (no relation)). We also have some very exciting profiles and interviews lined up, from familiar faces (Meet Tathiana, often seen at Goodmans Cafe!), to famous lawyers (PBSC hosted David Rudolf), to returning theatre productions on and offcampus (Hair, Fine China, and A Perfect Bowl of Pho). This issue might feel light on diversions, but worry not: Follies 2019 is just around the corner and we couldn’t be more excited (to have our Diversions Editor back from Follies’ clutches). In the meantime, flip to the most widely-read pages of our modest paper and laugh away at the most important aspect of exchange: gourmet European food reviews. And for those of you still looking for something to do on February 14, be sure to check out our favourite rom-coms for Valentine’s Day.

NEWS

DIVERSIONS

PBSC Hosts David Rudolf

McD’s Rankings on Exchange 18

January Faculty Council

Opiates of the Law School

Rom-Coms for Valentine’s

Rejected 1L Exam

Intra Vires

Law Games 2019 FEATURES Meet Tathiana Xavier

Conversation with Prof. Tushnet 7

ART Climbing the BigLaw Ladder

OPINIONS Conversation with Playwrights

Hart House’s Hair Review

Criminal Justice Omnibus Bill

Date Spots for Valentine’s

Have a Baby in Law School

I Want a Life Outside School

Put Words Counts on Exams

In Vino Veritas

In Cannabis Veritas

– Honghu Wang (2L) and Chloe Magee (3L)

Are you ready for

the bar exams?

EDITORS-AT-LARGE Tom Collins SUPERNUMERARY EDITORS Rachel Chan, Lily Chapnik Rosenthal, Robert Nanni, & Norm Yallen COPY EDITOR Ioana Dragalin LAYOUT EDITOR Alexandra Fox ARTISTS

DON’T PANIc.

Prepare with Emond’s Bar Preparation Manual. Free at emond.ca/CBPManual

save 15% on the CanBarPrep Course.

Can be taken online or in-class this spring in Toronto. Register at emondexamprep.ca and apply code 15UOT19 for the discount. Enrollment is limited.

Andrew Luba & Shari Nathan

ADVERTISING If you are interested in advertising, please email us at editor@ultravires.ca.

ERRORS If you notice any errors, please email us at editor@ultravires.ca.

Test Yourself with Online Practice Exams Full-length practice exams with realistic questions & a timer

Detailed answer explanations & performance review

Continuous access from purchase until next exam date

SUBMISSIONS If you would like to submit a tip, letter, or an article, please email us at editor@ultravires.ca. Ultra Vires reserves the right to edit submissions.

Emond Exam Prep • 1 Eglinton Ave E, Suite 600, Toronto ON emondexamprep.ca • emondexamprep@emond.ca • 1-888-837-0815

ultravires.ca

NEWS

January 30, 2019 | 3

PBSC Hosts Emilie Taman and David Rudolf On criminal defense and social justice ELLIE MINCHOPOULOS (2L)* On November 9, 2018, Pro Bono Students Canada had the distinct pleasure of hosting an intimate, student-focused event featuring Emilie Taman, a prominent Canadian lawyer, social justice advocate and co-host of the legal podcast, “The Docket,” in conversation with David Rudolf, a well-known criminal defense lawyer and lead defense lawyer in the Netf lix docuseries “The Staircase.” The conversation between Taman and Rudolf centred on wrongful convictions, access to justice, and the differences between the Canadian and American criminal justice systems. This inspiring gathering took place at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law and was attended by 50 social justice-minded law students. When asked what inspired him to become a criminal defense lawyer, Rudolf ref lected on several signif icant historical moments that inspired him to become a criminal defense lawyer: the Kent State shooting, Watergate, the Saturday Night Massacre, and a tour of the tombs (a pretrial detention centre). Through witnessing these events, Rudolf felt he was watching the disintegration of the rule of law. This served as a wake-up call that made him critically question the role of the government, while simultaneously aff irming his decision to attend law school. After completing law school, Rudolf knew that the more traditional path of working in a large law f irm was not for him. Instead, he “wanted to represent real people in criminal court,” which led him to his career as a legal aid clinic lawyer, providing legal representation to marginalized individuals in an effort to ease the struggles that accompany navigating the criminal justice system. Ref lecting on his life’s work, Rudolf mused that “it is amazingly rewarding to be in a position where you are helping other human beings. I am not defending someone [in this situation], I am helping them. People come in at the worst moment of their lives.” He further explained that, “in this role, you can push back against the abuse of power”, demonstrating that when injustices happen within the criminal justice system, pushing back is essential. When Taman asked why criminal justice reform was such a challenging issue, Rudolf spoke to several points including the need for more widespread information and education on the problems within the system. In doing so, he candidly confessed that he felt the situation within the criminal justice system would likely get worse before it got better. On a hopeful note, he spoke about the importance of law students recognizing the signif icance of pro bono, social justice, access to justice issues, and taking action in those areas while in law school. He said that both passion and a deeply rooted commitment to social justice were needed to undertake this work. As Rudolf shared, “this work has to

EMILIE TAMAN (LEFT) AND DAVID RUDOLF (RIGHT). PHOTO CREDIT: AMY C. WILLIS

ries clearly demonstrated the devastating be a calling.” Rudolf is also very well known for his impacts criminal proceedings can have on prominent role in the Netf lix docuseries, one’s life. When asked how he “The Staircase”, as Midealt with Michael Pechael Peterson’s lead legal defense lawyer. The con“[As a criminal defense terson’s conviction, Rudolf shared that he versation naturally turned lawyer], you can push held, and continues to to the intricacies and beback against the abuse hold, an absolute belief hind-the-scenes details of of power” —David in Peterson’s innocence. the show, which followed He also shared that the the real-life preparations Rudolf outcome of that case, and court proceedings of and the injustices that Peterson, who was on trial for the mysterious murder of his wife, Kath- he witnessed during it, have impacted the leen Peterson. Regardless of one’s beliefs in nature of his practice, resulting in him foPeterson’s guilt or innocence, this docuse- cusing almost entirely on civil rights cases.

From these lessons learned during the Peterson case, Rudolf now confronts the criminal justice system and his cases in new, social justice-minded ways. Emilie Taman and David Rudolf are inspiring examples of engaged, social justiceminded lawyers who aim to increase access to justice at every opportunity. Both are stellar examples of the incredible social justice work which is possible when going the extra mile. *Ellie Minchopoulos is a Program Coordinator for Pro Bono Students Canada. She would like to thank Amy C. Willis, Communications Coordinator for PBSC, for her help in editing this piece.

NEWS

4 | January 30, 2019

ultravires.ca

Faculty Council Discusses Tuition Cut, Health and Wellness Survey Results Dean claims tuition cut will disproportionately adversely impact law school; alcohol, weed the drugs of choice ERNEST TAM (1L) The first Faculty Council meeting of 2019 took place on Wednesday, January 16.

Ontario Government Tuition Cut

Dean Iacobucci briefly discussed the proposed tuition cuts from the Ontario Government. He asserted that a 10% cut to tuition would disproportionately impact the law school as compared to other faculties, since the law school’s grant from the central university budget is inadequate. The Dean speculated that professional programs that are entirely self-funded—such as Rotman’s executive MBA—may be exempted, but any program that requires a grant would likely be subject to the cut. He noted that the law school’s tuition is regulated and, therefore, ultimately subject to governmental fiat. [Editor’s note: The cuts had been leaked the day before the meeting, but have since been made official. Tuition for college and universities, including law schools, will be cut by 10% next year and remain frozen for two years.]

SLS and GLSA Update

Solomon McKenzie (3L), the President of the Students’ Law Society, presented a brief update on behalf of the SLS. He said that the SLS offered support for students throughout the Decem-

ber exam period and will be providing support for the 1L recruit. On the social side, McKenzie said that planning for Law Ball is well underway, and that the first Call to the Bar saw more than 200 students in attendance. The SLS is planning Oakes Day, in honour of the day the R v Oakes, [1986] 1 SCR 103, was decided, with a variety of punny, Oakes-related activities, such as the pressing and substantial breakfast. Jean-Christophe Bedard-Rubin, the VicePresident of the Graduate Law Students’ Society, recapped some recent events the GLSA hosted, such as a recent workshop with graduate students, and upcoming events, such as the ping pong tournament.

2018 Health and Wellness Survey

Yukimi Henry, the law school’s Manager of Academic/Personal Counselling and Wellness, discussed the results of the Health and Wellness Survey. The Mental Health Committee sent out the survey in an effort to take a more responsive and evidence-based approach to health and wellness issues. Overall, 45% of the entire law school student body participated in the survey and 50% of JD students responded. The sample was representa-

tive of U of T Law’s student body as a whole regarding sex, race, and year of study. Before beginning her presentation, Henry stressed that the results were merely diagnostic screening tools and that the data cannot be taken as indicative. Further, Henry did not present the underlying data. Rather, the data were compared to a 2016 study by Organ, et al., titled, “Suffering in Silence”, of 15 law schools and over 11,000 students in America, and the Canadian undergraduate population. Henry reported that U of T Law students had thoughts of self-harm and suicidality at rates on par with the Canadian undergrad population but at nearly twice the rate of US comparables. The rate of problematic alcohol consumption by students at U of T Law was slightly higher than US comparables and significantly higher than Canadian undergraduates. However, street drug use was significantly higher than US comparables. Yukimi acknowledged that this may be attributable to the more punitive drug regime in the US. The two most common drugs used by U of T students were marijuana and cocaine, although Henry noted that marijuana use was much more common than cocaine use. The most common recreationally-used prescription drugs were pain

medications and ADHD medications and the usage rates were considerably higher than US comparables or Canadian undergraduates. When asked what “pain meds” meant, Henry responded that the Committee did not survey for specific medications, but she suspected it meant “a whole lot of opioids.” In the last part of the presentation, Henry discussed health-seeking behaviours and attitudes of students. Overall, the Mental Health and Wellness Committee found that respondents were very forthcoming about their mental health and substance use—a major positive as the stigma surrounding these issues is often the greatest barrier to service access. One-third of respondents answered that they would seek help from a mental health professional for a mental health issue and one-fifth for substance use problems. The most common barriers to seeking help were “not having the time,” the belief that one can/ should deal with this on their own, and self-efficacy. From the survey’s results, the Dean’s Mental Health Advisory committee planned on exploring the next steps in systematic responses and enhancing the ongoing provision of mental health supports.

Law Games 2019 Showdown in Sherbrooke

lawyers

KARLOTA BORGES (2L)*

Driving diversity, innovation and leadership in business law.

00-200-0918-09 U of T Ultra Vires 2018-19_5x7_BW.indd 1

2018-09-20 9:29 AM

In the f irst week of January, twenty students at U of T Law ventured up to the quaint, wintry town of Sherbrooke, Quebec, to compete against other Canadian law schools at Law Games 2019. This year’s theme was “How to Get Away with Murder,” an appropriate title for a killer, week-long event, full of athletic activities all day and social events all night. You’re never quite sure if you will survive the whole week or simply drop dead from exhaustion at tomorrow’s soccer game, but that’s all part of the fun. We started our adventure with a sevenhour bus ride from Toronto to Sherbrooke, accompanied by the Osgoode and Windsor teams. U of T was the rowdiest (read: most obnoxious) team on the bus, deciding that we would get the party started early by blasting music for the whole bus to enjoy. Even when the speaker died, we insisted on entertaining the bus with poorly belted acapella renditions of all the classics including “American Pie”, “Sweet Caroline”, “Bohemian Rhapsody”, and “thank u, next.” Upon arrival, we checked in at the Delta Sherbrooke and headed to the pep rally held every f irst night at Law Games. After lacklustre chants of “Ps get Degrees,” we promptly lapsed into silence, maintaining our infamous lack of school spirit. We did, however, show more life at the pub crawl that night, particularly when we discovered Sherbrooke’s amazingly low drink prices. A good portion of the team took full advantage of the $4 jager bombs, which it may or may not have regretted the next morning. The Talent Show was the next night and, as usual, it did not disappoint. Highlights included Dalhousie’s classic pirate outf its and partial nudity in front of a panel of Stike-

man Elliott lawyers and/or judges of the Québec bench, Western’s egocentric routine rousing the usual “Fuck you, Western” chants from the rest of the law schools, and U of T’s own Liam Thompson (2L) and Honghu Wang (2L) slapping together a surprisingly funny last-minute news skit, titled “Uof TSN”. On the sports front, U of T exceeded expectations and made it to two semi-f inal rounds (two more than last year!) in volleyball and tug-of-war. Our team was unable to repeat our trivia triumph from last year due to an unfortunate change of the rules, but we did U of T proud just the same. One of our beloved captains, Eli Bordman (2L), also made it his mission to practice his advocacy skills and argue every single referee call possible, earning us a good deal of notoriety with the organizers. When asked for comment, Bordman maintained that he never lost his cool, even when trying to f ight the University of Saskatchewan’s captain, after a late headshot in dodgeball. Overall, U of T’s Law Games performance was a great success. Despite a few close calls, no one threw up on the volleyball court, even after a full night of drinking. We also managed to make friends with other schools, lose our voices, and throw one hell of a dance party in a U of T hotel room. I still have remnants of the Law Games f lu as a souvenir, including a gross cough that doesn’t want to go away (so sorry to those in classes with me), but I still have no regrets. Cheers to everyone on the team for an incredible Law Games! Here’s hoping I get rid of this cough in time for the next one. *Karlota Borges is a Co-captain of Law Games.

ultravires.ca

STATEMENT

January 30, 2019 | 5

SLS’ Interim Statement on Provincial University Policy How it’ll impact us and what we’re doing THE STUDENTS’ LAW SOCIETY On January 17th, the Provincial Government announced major policy changes to the Tuition Fee Policy governing Ontario Universities. The proposed policy changes will come into force in September of 2019, remaining in effect for the coming two academic years. Some details of the policy changes are still emerging and it appears that the Provincial Government may still be drafting parts of the proposed ministerial policy or legislation. Changes to the Tuition Framework will: 1. Impact university funding: The policy reduces tuition for all Ontario Universities by 10% and freezes tuition at this level for two years. However, the Province has not increased provincial funding to universities for roughly a decade. With no Provincial funding increase, the 10% drop in tuition fees will mean a reduction in the University’s total funds available for services and programs. 2. Changes to the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) a. Changes to the structure of OSAP: Under the old policy, students received substantial sums of money in the form of grants. The new policy requires all OSAP disbursements to include both a loan and a grant component and decreases the overall amount of the grant. The policy also abolishes the low-income free tuition program. b. Removes the Six-Month Grace Period for Interest Compounding on Loans: The old policy gave new graduates a six-month grace period during which loans would not accrue interest. Under the new policy, interest begins to accrue immediately following graduation. c. Raises the number of years a student must wait from high school to be considered independent from four to six. This means that parental income will be deemed for law students who apply to law school directly out of undergraduate or after a one year graduate program/one year work. 3. Make the payment of all non-tuition fees optional: This is part of a “Student Choice Initiative” with an exception carved out for health and wellness, walksafe, and counselling programs. The Students’ Law Society (SLS) is closely tracking Provincial policy developments and will provide updates to students as soon as possible. So far, we have been focused on information gathering, building bridges with similarly impacted organizations, and contingency planning. 1. 10% Tuition Decrease How it will impact the law school: The 10% tuition reduction will apply to Canadian residents and remain frozen at this level for two years. The Province has not matched this reduction with access to additional resources for the University. Universities and faculties must find a way to offset costs on their own. We have real concerns that this dramatic change in funding will have immediate impacts on the financial health of the law school. The law school already runs an annual structural deficit. Careful planning will be necessary to either mitigate or prevent the negative effects of a sudden reduction of tuition on the services and programs offered by the Law School. What is SLS doing right now? We have been in close conversation with other student governments at U of T, community groups, and alumni to get a sense of how these changes will impact our school. We are in conversation with the law school about how these changes will affect us. We will continue to advocate for students’ best interests throughout the course of this change and do our best to ensure that this change does not ultimately devalue the student experience at U of T law. 2. Changes to OSAP How it will impact the law school: a. Changes to OSAP structure It is unclear how deep an impact this change will have on the OSAP received

by law students. Given the shift from grants to loans, it will mean that a greater number of law students will graduate with a greater amount of debt. Cuts to OSAP may also increase the number of students who take out private loans. We are concerned that this change will increase economic stress for law students. The changes to OSAP could also impact the law school’s financial aid system. If students receive less OSAP, this will increase the total amount of unmet need. b. Removal of the Six-Month Grace Period on Loans Law students will be particularly negatively impacted by the removal of the six-month grace period on loans. Under the new policy, interest will begin to accrue on OSAP loans immediately after graduation, which typically occurs during articling. Since the interest will accrue on students’ entire OSAP amount, the interest will be at its peak. This will have an especially negative impact on law students who are paid a lower salary during articles. c. Raise in the number of years from 2-4 years This means that students that apply to law school directly after undergraduate or one year after undergraduate will still be considered dependent students and have their parental income deemed in calculating eligibility for OSAP. This will bar currently eligible law students from OSAP. This will particularly impact students that are ineligible for the law school’s financial aid. Overall, this will substantially limit the loan resources that students can access. It is unclear if this program will be grandfathered so that current 1Ls and 2Ls will be able to continue accessing OSAP. What is SLS doing right now? We are working with other law schools in Ontario to work out the extent of the impact on law students. We are collecting information with other law schools that will help us advocate to the Provincial Government, as well as ensure that students are properly informed about the severity of the impact. The current OSAP calculator does not yet reflect the province’s changes. We understand that students may have questions about how this policy will impact their personal finances. We are working hard to get accurate figures concerning the impact on OSAP. 3. Optional Fees How it will impact the law school: We expect the government’s proposal to make all non-tuition fee payments optional will include student government fees. If this is true, SLS fees will likely become optional. SLS understands that law school is an enormous financial burden and that students may choose to opt out of student fees to save costs. The SLS budget currently funds student clubs’ events, panel lunches, Halloween, Law Ball, O-Week, and intramurals. These activities are all paid for or subsidized by SLS’s mandatory student fee. Making the SLS fee optional will have real consequences for how SLS and student clubs operate within the law school. This change will also impact wider services offered at U of T. For instance, the University of Toronto Students’ Union (UTSU) administers the Universitywide health and dental plan, in addition to providing various services that assist clubs at the law school. What is SLS doing right now? We are working closely with other student governments to understand the depth and degree of this policy’s expected impact. We will continue to work closely with the law school administration and with U of T Central in order to ensure that the implementation of this policy prioritizes student needs. We will be discussing these changes in our upcoming meetings. To discuss these points further, we encourage students to attend these meetings, contact us by email, and attend the SLS Student Experience Townhall on Thursday, January 31st at lunchtime in J140.

6 | January 30, 2019

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

Meet Goodmans LLP Cafe’s Tathiana Xavier One of two full-time staffers, Tathiana is a daily figure at the law school MICHELLE HUANG (1L)

PHOTO CREDIT: HONGHU WANG (2L)

A sweet soul with a bubbly personality, Tathiana Xavier is one of two full-time staf fers at Goodmans LLP Cafe. Hailing from Brazil, Tathiana arrived in Canada three years ago as a landed immigrant. Back home as a journalism graduate, she had worked for the internal communications department of Petrobras, a position which allowed her to conduct interviews as well as dabble in commerce. However, due to insecurity in Brazil’s economic, social, and political atmospheres, Tathiana and her husband left to rebuild a future in Canada. Tathiana started out working at a privately-run Second Cup at the University of Toronto bookstore. She then moved from to the Starbucks at the Athletic Centre before being stationed around campus in non-permanent positions at various cafes. Two years ago, she was stationed at Goodmans when Jackman Hall was f irst opened. That turned into a permanent position and now she is a daily f igure here at the law school.

When asked about her experience at the Law Faculty compared to her other stints around campus, Tathiana enthusiastically states that law students are the best customers she’s ever had. They are generally polite, nice, and have a smile to give the staf f, even when they are stressed—and she can really feel the stress permeate from her student clientele sometimes. She senses the stress levels rise and fall as the school semester unfolds, knows the looks of faces before and after exams, and can sometimes intuit whether a student did well on an exam or not. However, given one word to describe law students here, Tathiana says “dedicated”—“Even when I was in school and holding a job, I was never like this. On weekends and holidays, you guys are always here. I think it’s beautiful and I am proud of the students.” While there are many things to love about her work, including her close relationship with Jess, the other full-time staf fer, Tathiana loves the social and relationship-building aspect of her job. On bad

days, coming to work can even change her mood, Tathiana says. In addition to actively feeling appreciated, she describes students as open to sharing personal experiences such as in-f irm interviews. In this way, students enable connections and friendships to develop. Sometimes, the team receives Christmas cards and thoughtful notes from graduating students, Tathiana shares. “I see you guys more than even my husband at home, so these connections are beautiful and important to me.” Of course, the job also comes with its challenges. “We would like a bigger team, but the university isn’t hiring anymore full-time staf f and there are gaps between part-time shifts,” Tathiana explains. As a testament to their frequent understaf fed state, during this interview, one of the two staf f had to leave to f ill-in the cafe in the music building while the single music cafe staf f went on break. This left one person to cover the long lunch-time line at Goodmans.

Outside of her position at Goodmans LLP Cafe, Tathiana enjoys going dancing downtown with her girlfriends. During the wintertime, her friends hide out in each other’s homes and host board game nights almost every weekend. In pursuit of her passion for journalism and social relationships, Tathiana has also picked up a public relations course at the University. She hopes to one day work as a Student Life Assistant, which she describes as her “dream job.” Having given up a future in Brazil and beginning to rebuild a life in Canada, Tathiana has some parting words to share. “Life sometimes seems dif f icult and hard, but you always get rewarded if you do what you want to do. It might be delayed a little bit, but as long as you recognize the value in yourself f irst, you will always get to your dreams.” P.S. For a simple and sweet treat, Tathiana recommends the almond latte at Goodmans Café.

ultravires.ca

FEATURES

January 30, 2019 | 7

A Conversation with Professor Mark Tushnet The 2019 Cecil A. Wright Lecture: Institutions for Protecting Constitutional Democracy: Some Conceptual Preliminaries CAMERON COTTON-O’BRIEN (1L) Professor Mark Tushnet, of Harvard Law School, sleep. He was concerned, as many others were, is a deeply committed democrat—not in the parthat the US had just elected a president who was tisan sense, but rather as a thinker whose scholsimply not interested in mobilizing institutions to arly career is deeply marked by an abiding interprotect democracy. Rather, the then Presidentest in the protection of democracy, that delicate elect was one who was nurturing an active interest but eminently worthwhile way of organizing sociin undermining democracy itself. With this in ety. mind, Prof. Tushnet wrote to one of his friends at It only makes sense that the central theme of the University of Toronto Faculty of Law. Prof. Tushnet’s address, at this year’s Cecil A. He said, “The election of Donald Trump in Wright Lecture on January 22, 2019, was to ar2016 raised real questions for me about the stabilticulate how institutions protecting constitutional ity and justifiability of the US constitutional sysdemocracy succeed and fail. tem, with implications for the quality of my own One of the key lessons, it turned out, was that it life. And so immediately after the election I is not always about the institutions themselves. opened a correspondence with a friend on the U During his lecture, Prof. of T [law] faculty to explore Tushnet noted that one of the possibility of establishing the most befuddling things some sort of relationship “The election of we now understand about this faculty. And I think Donald Trump in 2016 with institutional design is that, this visit is in part the result raised real questions for of that inquiry.” Prof. Tushwhen it comes to democracy-supporting institutions, net was quick to qualify that me about the stability such as courts, tribunals and situation in the US had and justifiability of the the government agencies, what not developed as quickly or US constitutional works in one place may fall severely as he feared. system” —Prof. flat in another. Yet, we canHow do law students fit not account for this through into the relationship beTushnet better designing the institutween individuals and instition. tutions preserving democraRaising the problem of corruption specifically, cy? Prof. Tushnet views the law school as Prof. Tushnet noted that, in some places, a welloperating on primarily two functions in relation designed institution will have a tremendous imto its students. The first, to disabuse them of a pact upon curbing corruption while in other locommonly held thought, and the second, to instill cales it will have almost no impact at all. The a perhaps uncommonly held idea. converse is also true: a poorly designed institution Prof. Tushnet explained, “[There are] two prican, despite itself, have a great positive impact in mary things in connection with the preservation some places while having virtually none in others. of democratic society. [The first is] educating lawIt all comes down to who has the political powyers so that they understand how indeterminate er—or perhaps the charisma—to make one legal rules are, and therefore don’t assume that agenda stick more than the other. legalism as such is sufficient to support democraThat is probably what caused Prof. Tushnet to cy. The second is imbuing a professional ethic in find himself awake at 2 am after the 2016 US which the work lawyers do in which lawyers beElection night on November 6, 2016, unable to lieve they have a role in preserving democracy

PHOTO CREDIT: CHENSIYUAN. LICENSED UNDER CC BY-SA 4.0. HTTPS://COMMONS.WIKIMEDIA.ORG/WIKI/FILE:1_MARK_TUSHNET_SMU_2018.JPG.

independent of their commitment to the law as such.” The law school, therefore, is supposed to unsettle the naïve faith in the law as panacea for society’s problems while imbuing in students the view that absent such a fix-all we are all there is. Yet, as Prof. Tushnet notes from his experience teaching in America, law schools do not always achieve this dual purpose. Rather, law schools are very good at the first but fall relatively behind on the second—with dangerous results. He said, “If you’ve taken away legalism as a support for democracy and you don’t put something else in, then lawyers are not going to be

committed qua professionals to the preservation of democracy.” Fundamentally, Prof. Tushnet is concerned about the preservation of democratic societies and with highlighting the limited ways in which the law can preserve these beacons of human possibility. What he wants to remind us is that the law is only ever a tool to be used by individuals who, guided by their own lights, understand what should be done. The institution itself cannot matter, for the institution is directed by those who choose to care. This explains why the election of a single man can be so distressing to one of America’s leading constitutional law scholars.

The Demise of the Journal of International Law and International Relations (Continued from page 1) in being involved. “We tried to f ight for it,” Boulanger said. She continued, “We met with Sara Faherty and the Dean, but they were just unwilling.” Beyond the academic reasons, Boulanger thinks that practical concerns led to the journal’s end. While the other student-run journals were subject to much more super vision and faculty oversight, JIL IR was more collegial and set their own deadlines. A fter the Munk School dropped out, there was no longer a faculty sponsor and the staf f were unable to f ind someone from the Faculty of Law who had enough time and interest to commit to the journal. A lthough Boulanger agrees that the f ield has grown, she does not think this was a good reason to end the journal. She said, “There’s still so much interest in that area and students who wanted to work on it. I’m sure the things we could have taken will end up somewhere else, but

ute to an academic journal. With tuition a there’s no downside to having a space decontentious matter, it is unlikely that the voted to just that.” law school will start another journal, A lthough its website is now defunct, which costs any where between $5,000 to there is no mention of the cancellation on $15,000. While the Unithe Faculty’s homepage, versity of Toronto Faculty of which lists JIL IR as one of four student-run jourIn 2017, JILIR held the Law Review (UTFL R) has a group dedicated to innals at the law school. fourth-best overall ternational law, it does Law reviews have long score among Canadian not produce the same been a popular and reputable extracurricular law journals according volume of work that a journal dedicated to the for aspiring law yers to annual rankings subject did. while in school. The creproduced by In 2017, JIL IR dentials look extremely Washington and Lee held the fourth-best good on resumes, at least overall score among Caaccording to the law University. nadian law journals acschool grapevine, and cording to annual rankthe work also gives stuings produced by Washington and Lee dents the chance to review, edit, and conUniversity. It scored 2.1 out of 100 and template contemporar y legal ideas. J IL was cited 52 times, behind the Osgoode, McIR’s discontinuation means there are 40 G ill, and University of Toronto Law Journals, to 50 fewer spots for students to contrib-

which scored 2.3, 3.5 and 4.7 respectively. ( The Harvard Law Review, for comparison, routinely scores 100). By contrast, in 2017, UTFL R scored just 0.5 out of 100, ranking 22nd in Canada. W hen Boulanger was discussing the end of JIL IR w ith the Facult y, she felt that the focus was on improv ing the rev iew process, the qualit y of the facult y’s journals, and U T FL R, despite that journal being less academically impactful. “I got the sense that the school was valuing the f inal product over the student experience,” she said. As a J D/MGA student, Boulanger also saw JIL IR as a rare opportunit y for collaboration between the two schools. From the Munk side, it gave global af fairs students interested in law a chance to interact w ith the subject matter. “A nd I think we could have created a really good f inal product,” she concluded, “and they didn’t g ive us a chance to tr y.”

8 | January 30, 2019

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

LEFT TO RIGHT: NAM NGUYEN, NIGHTINGALE NGUYEN, JULIE PHAN ALL STAR IN FINE CHINA. PHOTO CREDIT: DAHLIA KATZ, COURTESY OF FU-GEN ASIAN CANADIAN THEATRE COMPANY.

A Conversation with the Playwrights Behind Fine China and A Perfect Bowl of Pho A play and musical, respectively, on love, family, identity, and good food HONGHU WANG (2L) Fine China is a three-hander drama that tells the story of an estranged daughter, Kim Vu, returning home for the funeral of her father. Playwright Julie Phan stars as Kim, while Nam Nguyen plays her father. Nightingale Nguyen (no relation) plays Audrey Vu, the other, more “successful” daughter, who is initially hostile to Kim’s return. Past and present blur together as the story unfolds. Through a series of flashbacks, we learn why Kim left the household, and what compelled her to return. Phan makes room for humour in this powerful story of family, love, and forgiveness despite dialogue that at times feels forced and heavy. A Perfect Bowl of Pho is a funny musical that tells the story behind the popular, Vietnamese, rice-noodle dish, featuring a twelve member cast and a six-piece live band. Given the ambitious scope, the production sometimes felt more like a revue than a complete musical. However, playwright Nam

Nguyen manages to tie the disparate scenes together with cheeky fourth-wall breaks and dynamic musical numbers. The latter includes “Medium Pho,” which tells the story of a girl embarrassed about ordering a larger bowl of pho than her date; “Life is Hard,” which talks about both calculus and a refugee’s story; and “Coming Home,” a song about identity and family. The story manages to be sincere and moving, despite its healthy dose of chaos. But then, such is life. Fine China is written and directed by Julie Phan. A Perfect Bowl of Pho is written by Nam Nguyen, directed by Gianni Sallese, with music by Wilfred Moeschter and Nam Nguyen. The shows are presented by fu-GEN Asian Canadian Theatre Company and they are produced by Saigon Lotus and Hotake Theatre Company. Fine China has been previously presented at The Woodlands School, as well as the Toronto Fringe Festival. A Perfect Bowl of Pho won the

President’s Award for Best Production at the University of Toronto Drama Festival and was later presented at the Paprika Festival. The double bill of Fine China and A Perfect Bowl of Pho runs until February 10 at the Factory Theatre, 125 Bathurst Street (at Adelaide Street West). Tickets are $30 at www.factorythreatre.ca or (416) 504-9971. Interview with Julie Phan Phan is an eighteen-year-old graduate of The Woodlands Secondary School in Mississauga and currently studies general arts at McGill University. She is the daughter of first-generation Vietnamese-Chinese immigrants to Canada. Ultra Vires: Tell us about this double bill with A Perfect Bowl of Pho. What are the common themes that connect the two shows?

Julie Phan: There is a lot of love, in both these shows, that is stated in a way that isn’t explicit. With Fine China, the way you are with your family, you don’t say you love each other but a lot of your actions are motivated by love. Whereas in Pho, I get the similar feeling of love expressed through food or in other ways, whether through communal dinners or ways that don’t involve you saying “I love you,” but it’s there. UV: Fine China was inspired by your own relationships with your family, is that right? JP: Yea. It was mostly inspired by my relationship with my father and my relationship with my sister, and how their relationship had an effect on me. When my sister was closer to my age, she and my dad got into a pretty big fight that ended with them not speaking and my dad telling me that I wasn’t allowed to speak to my sister. So, there was a point in time where for a year or two years, I wasn’t speaking to my sister.

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

January 30, 2019 | 9

LEFT TO RIGHT: MEGHAN AGUIRRE, JUSTIN PARK, JACOB PENG, MAX GU, SAI LIAN MACIKUNAS, VICTORIA NGAI, NAM NGUYEN, KENLEY FERRIS-KU IN A PERFECT BOWL OF PHO. PHOTO CREDIT: DAHLIA KATZ, COURTESY OF FU-GEN ASIAN CANADIAN THEATRE COMPANY.

I didn’t know why but I was just listening to what my father was telling me. When I did reconnect with her later, and I found out what happened, I felt guilt. That guilt helped inspire Fine China.

JP: Yes, we eventually started talking again. The relationship didn’t get fixed right away but I did let her back into my life and it kind of fixed itself as time went on.

UV: You use flashbacks in time to tell the story. Can you tell us a bit about that?

Interview with Nam Nguyen Nguyen is twenty-one years old and also graduated form The Woodlands School. He currently studies drama at the University of Toronto. His parents are first-generation VietnameseCanadians.

JP: When you think back on the past and maybe on regretful actions that you’ve taken, you don’t remember things linearly. Your brain picks up on moments and words and sentences that really build up and are based on how you feel about how you remember that time. I think, with the flashbacks, even though something happened in the past, objectively, they’re just remembered in very different ways between the two sisters, where one was living in it and being alienated, while the other just doesn’t have the full picture. Even though Kim was living in it and she was the one experiencing screaming with her father, there are things that you don’t want to remember. So, you don’t, until you kind of have to dig that back out. UV: What’s next for you after the show finishes its run? JP: I should probably go back to school (I haven’t been to class since winter break). I’m applying to the National Theatre School’s playwriting program. Fingers crossed. UV: So I guess more writing is in store for you. Do you like the writing more or the acting more? JP: I’m probably better suited as a writer. UV: There was a little bit of a happy ending in the story. Did you have a chance to make up with your sister?

UV: Did your interest in writing musicals start at The Woodlands School? NN: I started liking musicals when I was around fourteen. We did Les Misérables at school and I was like, “Hey, I can do this; this is easy!” (laughter) It’s actually very hard. UV: This is the third time that Pho has been produced. What was the decision to bring it back? And to pair it with Fine China? NN: It was really David Yee, the artistic director of fu-GEN [Asian Canadian Theatre Company], who reached out. It just happened to be a neat coincidence that two of the young Vietnamese-Canadian playwrights in Toronto right now happened to go to the same high school and have worked together in the past. UV: What’s special about this show? NN: There was a scene that we swapped out— Scene 8. That is all new for this run. That was really based on the input of the artistic director. The scene we had before was very funny but it was substituted in a way so that we could talk about what we want to talk about versus the easy jokes we could make. UV: The show has a very dynamic range of

highs and lows. The show overall is very meta. What was the inspiration behind writing the wide range of emotions in this musical? NN: It’s hard to say what the drive behind that is other than to show people what the story is. In the end, when you have the idea to do this show; you have a story that you need to service well. There is this education dimension to it that is kind of weird in some senses—like, do we always want minorities to be educators in Canadian culture or whatever, but that is very much there, because a lot of the audience doesn’t know these things and a lot of history is involved. So, it is in a lot of senses just presenting the story of what happened and real life will work itself into the play. It doesn’t have to be funny and it doesn’t have to be sad. Whatever it is, you just have to tell it. UV: Besides the parallels between VietnameseCanadian identity in both Pho and Fine China, are there any other parallelism we can draw from the two showings as a double-billing? NN: The really nice thing is that they contrast each other. Fine China is very down-to-earth family drama. It is very much about representing a family dynamic that you could reasonably see existing. It does remind me of some elements of my own family in some ways. Pho is much larger-than-life and it casts a much wider net of human history. Because it covers such a larger thing—larger in the sense of scope—the emotional content is very different. It can afford to take so many different styles. Fine China has this very specific style that I think balances out the whole billing. UV: There’s this funny scene where your dad is telling a story where he works at Pho Hung, where the owners took the waiters’ tips. Is that a true story?

NN: Yes, but don’t tell them that I told you that. I still eat there (laughter). [Editor’s Note: A manager at Pho Hung says all the tips are pooled into a pot before they are divided between the wait staff.] UV: What’s next for you? NN: I’m not sure what comes next, to be honest. I need to graduate first. I’m in my fourth year out of five [at U of T]. It’s hard to say. UV: Between the acting side and the writing side, which one do you like more? NN: The thing is, I started writing from a place of “What would be really funny for me and my friends to perform?” I’ve tended to act in my shows that I write as well. I would say writing is more my wheelhouse. UV: Anything else our readers should know? NN: Come see the show! It’s a real spectrum of Vietnamese-Canadian theatre, which is having a really good year this year. UV: One last thing. On the record, what’s your favourite place to have pho in the city? NN: Damn, that’s hard. My favourite place is Pho Tien Thanh [57 Ossington Avenue, at Queen Street West]. It’s a little pricier than most of the ones in Chinatown but it’s very legit. UV: And what would be the dish that you get there? NN: Pho tai nam. The rare beef flank. It’s the dish we order in the show. The above interviews have been condensed and edited for clarity.

OPINIONS

10 | January 30, 2019

ultravires.ca

“Everyone just… gets naked… Why?” Hart House Theatre presents Hair LILY CHAPNIK ROSENTHAL (2L JD/MSW) I feel as though it is important to establish that this is my first time seeing the iconic 1967 musical Hair. I feel that by admitting this, you might judge me less for my utter unpreparedness for all this show has to offer, from its absurdist tendencies to its fullfrontal nudity. When I texted a friend at intermission to say, “THERE ARE NAKED PEOPLE ON STAGE” her response was, “so, that’s Hair!” I felt ignorant. Refer to the title, taken verbatim from my scrawled, fevered notes. The musical opens with seemingly disjointed scenes of a group of friends, self-identified as “The Tribe,” who are hippies living a communal lifestyle in New York in the late 1960s. Although their interactions seem like a drug-fueled daze that the viewer should also be high to enjoy, small clues as to the musical’s message emerge throughout the first half—parents fighting with their son about his direction in life or an American flag slowly being folded. In the second half, the message becomes clear. Claude (Christian Hodge), a member of The Tribe, loses his fight with his ambivalence over being drafted for Vietnam, casts off his hippie identity, and enlists. It is heavily implied that he is killed in the war. In retrospect, the dazed nature of the rest of the show stands in stark contrast to this reality—a retrospective for so many Americans at the time. Although the play did eventually come together, it was a truly bizarre experience. For most of the first half, I had the distinct feeling that I was

watching a soap opera in a foreign language—I really should be smart enough to figure out the plot, but it was just out of my reach. The nudity was just odd (although it appears in the original script) and I was most definitely NOT prepared for it. I also kept smelling patchouli, which I wasn’t sure was someone’s perfume or some kind of olfactory experience to invoke general ‘hippiness.’ When the plot started to coalesce, I questioned whether the show was starting to make more sense, or whether I had simply let go of all expectations. I eventually decided on the former, but it was rather unsettling to consider the latter. The production itself was rather strong, especially for the affordable price of Hart House Theatre. The acting and singing were well done, the set was creative and versatile, and the costumes were gorgeous and reminiscent of the currently in-style stores Anthropologie and Free People. However, there were also some challenges. The sound was poorly mixed throughout rendering the lyrics sometimes difficult to hear. This was disappointing, especially given that the play has been running for over a week already and there has been ample time to troubleshoot technical challenges. If you enjoy non-linear, psychedelic art, this is the show for you. If not, you can still enjoy—just don’t be clueless like me. Content warning: NUDITY. Now don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Hair: The American Tribal Love-Rock Musical Book and lyrics by Gerome Ragni and James Rdo. Music by Galt MacDermot. Produced for the Broadway stage by Michael Butler. Originally Produced by the New York Shakespeare Festival Theatre. Directed by Julie Tomaino. This production runs until February 2 at the Hart House Theatre. Tickets: Adults: $28, Seniors: $17, Students: $15. $12 student tickets available every Wednesday evening. Buy tickets at tickets.harthouse.ca or (416) 978-8849.

CHRISTIAN HODGE AS CLAUDE. PHOTO CREDIT: SCOTT GORMAN, COURTESY OF HART HOUSE THEATRE.

PERFORMERS LEFT TO RIGHT: CLAIRE BOUDREAU AS MARY, MIKAELA MACGILLIVRAY AS NATALIE, DAVID ANDREW REID AS HUD, SIDNEY KLIPS AS DIANE. PHOTO CREDIT: SCOTT GORMAN, COURTESY OF HART HOUSE THEATRE.

January 30, 2019 | 11

ultravires.ca

RIGHTS REVIEW The International Human Rights Program at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law An independent student-led publication Co-Editors-in-Chief: Anne-Rachelle Boulanger (4L JD/MGA) & Brenda Chang (3L) Senior Editors: Chelsey Legge (4L JD/MPP) & Emily Tsui (2L JD/MGA)

JUSTICE, RECONCILIATION, AND EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN: THE ISSUE OF JAPANESE MILITARY SEXUAL SLAVERY By Daniel Ki-Won Moon (2L) victims’ demands — a proper apology and reparations. In January 2018, the newly elected South Korean government urged Japan to provide a fresh apology and announced in November that the “Reconciliation and Healing Foundation” would be dissolved. In essence, the government revoked the agreement previously made by former President Park and Prime Minister Abe. Around the same time, the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances observed that the issue of Japanese military sexual slavery was not finally and irreversibly solved. Japan, nonetheless, maintains the position that the 2015 Agreement settled the issue. Closing Remarks: The Road Ahead Last May, I left for Asia with the aim of producing educational material for ALPHA Education discussing the legal issues at stake in the issue of Japanese military sexual slavery. Over 2.5 months, I travelled to China, South Korea, and Japan in order to engage more directly with the issue and to witness current developments in the three countries. I visited museums, met with surviving victims, interviewed professors, researchers, and activists, participated in the weekly protests, and interned at an advocacy NGO for the surviving victims.

‘COMFORT WOMEN’ MUSEUM IN NANJING, CHINA. PHOTO BY DANIEL KI-WON MOON (2L)

Last June, I witnessed people young and old gather every Wednesday in front of the Japanese Embassy in Seoul, to demand a formal apology and reparations for the over 200,000 women who were coerced into military sexual slavery by Japan between 1932 and 1945. These victims were euphemistically called ‘comfort women’. From May to July 2018, I had the opportunity to research the issue in China, South Korea, and Japan with the generous funding of the International Human Rights Program and the support of ALPHA Education. ‘Comfort Stations’ in Asia When Nanking fell to Japan in 1937 during the Sino-Japanese War, an estimate of 200,000 to 300,000 people were indiscriminately massacred and thousands were raped by the Japanese Imperial Army. The news of these atrocities sparked outcry from the international community. In response, Japanese officials instigated a wide-scale expansion of ‘comfort stations’, which were military controlled facilities where victims of Japanese military sexual slavery were confined, tortured, and raped. Recruitment often involved abduction and deception. According to Carmen Argibay, “[by] confining rape and sexual abuse to military-controlled facilities, the Japanese government hoped to prevent atrocities like the Rape of Nanking or, if such atrocities did occur, to conceal them from the international press.” While most of the victims came from Korea and China, many were also taken from the countries and territories occupied by the Japanese forces in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. By 1945, Japan

ihrprightsreview

had established ‘comfort stations’ throughout a vast part of Asia, including China, Singapore, Taiwan, the Philippines, British Malaya, New Guinea, and Truk Island. Road to Justice: Legal History and Challenges After Japan’s unconditional surrender, the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal was convened in 1946 to prosecute leaders of the Empire of Japan. At the tribunal, the crime of military sexual slavery was never addressed, and it was largely ignored by Japan and the international community until Kim Hak-Soon broke the silence in 1991 by going public with her testimony. Her bravery inspired a series of lawsuits against the Japanese Government and prompted other survivors to come forward. To this day, however, none of the ‘comfort women’ lawsuits brought before the Japanese judiciary have succeeded. While recognizing the veracity of the plaintiffs’ factual claims, Japanese courts dismissed the claims on procedural grounds, such as the waiver of claims under treaties. Japan has signed a number of treaties that purport to provide redress for its wartime action, such as the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, the 1965 Japan-Republic of Korea Agreement, and the 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Communique. In the ‘comfort women’ lawsuits, the Supreme Court of Japan and lower courts held that the treaties extinguished the claimants’ right to bring substantive claims, while the Supreme Court of Korea ruled last October that the San Francisco Peace Treaty and the 1965 Agreement did not waive the right of plaintiffs in that case to sue a Japanese steel company re-

sponsible for their forced labour during WWII. In his concurring opinion, Justice Lee Kitaek opined that the treaties, at most, waived South Korea’s right to diplomatic protection— that is, the right of South Korea as a state to bring claims on behalf of its national citizens who were injured by Japan’s illegal acts— and not the claimants’ right to a civil action. Recent Developments In a 1996 report on the issue of Japanese military sexual slavery, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Radhika Coomaraswamy, urged Japan to (1) acknowledge its violations of international law and accept legal responsibilities; (2) pay compensation to the survivors; (3) make a full disclosure of documents and materials in its possession regarding ‘comfort stations’; (4) make a public apology in writing to individual victims; (5) raise awareness of the issue by amending educational curricula; and (6) as far as possible, identify and punish perpetrators. In 2015, the now-impeached President Park Geun-Hye of South Korea and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan announced that they had come to an agreement whereby Japan would provide a one-time monetary contribution of approximately 12 million CAD to establish the “Reconciliation and Healing Foundation” for the survivors of Japanese military sexual slavery. The agreement was purely verbal and was to be a “final and irreversible resolution.” It was met with heavy criticism in South Korea for lacking crucial elements of the

ihrp.law.utoronto.ca/page/rights-review-magazine

In my conversation with attorney Kang Jian, who played an instrumental role in bringing Chinese ‘comfort women’ lawsuits against Japan, she suggested that legal avenues for redress were no longer available. Instead, she emphasized the importance of education. During my time in South Korea, I witnessed hundreds of elementary, high school, and college students come out to the Japanese Embassy every Wednesday to participate in the weekly protests. I believe that their active advocacy efforts demonstrate the power of education. During the last days of my fellowship, I asked professor Kimura of Seinan Gakuin University in Japan about what motivated him to conduct research into victims of Japanese military sexual slavery in Indonesia. His answer was simple: it is a human rights issue. To that end, I believe that Canada’s moral and human rights obligations call us to direct our attention to the issue. Perhaps, it begins with education. The executive director of ALPHA Education, Flora Chong, has often said that the history of World War II in Asia is neglected in Western societies. Last summer, there were 28 surviving victims in South Korea, five of whom I had the chance to meet. Today, there are 25. In what will likely be a long and arduous battle, it is incumbent on present and future generations to resolve the issue. It is my hope that through continued research and education, the global community can produce the impetus to deliver overdue justice. ALPHA Education (Association for Learning and Preserving the History of World War II in Asia) is an educational NGO working to “foster awareness of an often-overlooked aspect of WWII history, in the interest of furthering the values of justice, peace, and reconciliation, both for survivors of the past and for those who shape the historical narratives of the present and future.”

rightsreview

RIGHTS REVIEW

12 | January 30, 2019

ultravires.ca

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IN CANADA: AN INTERVIEW WITH INTERVENORS IN R V VICE MEDIA By Rachel Bryce (2L JD/MGA)

MEMBERS OF THE INTERVENOR COALITIONS OUTSIDE THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA DURING THE R V VICE MEDIA PROCEDURE. (FROM LEFT TO RIGHT) PETRA MOLNAR, IHRP RESEARCHER, MARGAUX EWEN, NORTH AMERICA DIRECTOR FOR REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS, ALEXANDRA ELLERBECK, NORTH AMERICA PROGRAM COORDINATOR FOR THE COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS, AND NICK TAYLOR-VAISEY, THEN PRESIDENT OF THE CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF JOURNALISTS. PHOTO CREDIT: UNKNOWN

Background R v Vice Media centers on the issue of freedom of the press and the judicial balancing necessary when freedom of the press conflicts with national security concerns. On November 30, 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) ruled unanimously in the Government’s favour, dismissing Vice Media and journalist Ben Makuch’s appeal. In 2014, Mr. Makuch interviewed and published three stories on Vice Media about Farah Mohamed Shirdon, an alleged member of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Subsequently, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) sought a Production Order [“the Order”] ex parte (without providing notice to the implicated party, i.e. Mr. Makuch) for Vice Media to provide the data and all communications between Mr. Makuch and Mr. Shirdon to complement their investigation of Mr. Shirdon for potential involvement with ISIS. The Ontario Court of Justice (OCJ) granted the Order on February 13, 2015. Vice Media appealed the decision to the OCJ, then again to the Ontario Court of Appeal, and finally to the SCC, which issued its decision in the case on xxx, 2018. The key issue on appeal focused on the administrative framework within which the authorizing judge decided to grant the Order: the Lessard principle. Established in Canadian Broadcasting Corp v Lessard, the principle means to balance “the state’s interest in the investigation and prosecution of crime, and the media’s right of privacy in gathering and reporting the news.” Vice and Mr. Makuch posited that the Government violated their section 8 right to protection from unreasonable search and seizure and their section 2(b) right to freedom of the press. They, along with the coalitions of intervenors promoting journalists’ rights and freedom of the press, argued that the Lessard principle should be modified to include the “chilling effect on the media” when police seek production orders. The majority opinion defines this effect broadly: “it refers to the stifling or discouragement of the media’s legitimate activities

ihrprightsreview

in gathering and disseminating the news for fear of legal repercussions such as compelled disclosure.” Despite this broad definition, Justice Moldaver ruled that any potential chilling effect should be assessed on a case-by-case basis rather than presumed in every case. The majority concluded that, considering the context – particularly that the source was not confidential – the national security interest in investigating and prosecuting suspected terrorist affiliates easily outweighs the alleged intrusion on press privacy and press freedom. Significance To better understand the significance of this case, I interviewed two intervenors involved in an international coalition of twelve intervenors advocating for reporters’ rights. Margaux Ewen, North America Director for Reporters Without Borders (RSF), is a leading voice on reporters’ rights and freedom of the press. Petra Molnar, Technology and Human Rights Researcher with the International Human Rights Program (IHRP) at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law, consulted the coalition on relevant international law and how it framed the issues of the case. RSF first began working with locally-based organizations -- Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (CJFE), the Canadian Association of Journalists (CAJ), and the Fédération Professionelle des Journalistes du Québec (FPJQ) -- in a domestic coalition. When Vice Media went forward before the SCC, RSF joined an international coalition led by the Media Legal Defence Initiative to provide further advocacy from interested groups from other common law countries. To both women, the significance of this case lies in the tenor of the judiciary. Most concerning are the broader implications for press freedom in Canada; the precedent for Government access to journalists’ sources; and the lack of opportunity for journalists to hold the Government accountable.

Ms. Molnar connected this to the prevention of journalists from entering and investigating land grabs of Indigenous territory, specifically regarding the development of the Keystone Pipeline. The barring of reporters on the scene raises serious concerns about the state of our democracy and press freedom. Ms. Ewen noted that the Vice Media ruling raises similar systemic issues infringing on journalistic freedom and the ability to report freely to the public, Furthermore, the fact that the materials the police were trying to acquire in Makuch’s case were not necessary in the investigation, as the source in question had been killed and the RCMP was already cooperating with American authorities, suggests that R v Vice Media was designed to establish precedent to which the Government will be able to refer for future use. Canada’s status as a protector of civil liberties and relative supporter of press freedom - Canada was 18th on RSF’s Press Freedom Index in 2017 makes this decision a notable deviation from Canada’s stated democratic priorities. In both the majority and the concurring opinions, the “chilling effect” of permitting police authority over unpublished materials is acknowledged. However, the alleged national security interests were deemed more important. Ms. Ewen insisted that “in general, terrorism should never be an excuse to prosecute news providers,” and that “national security should not be an excuse to go against freedom of the press.” In any case involving civil liberties, Ms. Molnar explained, the state acts as if national security is an untouchable threshold, awarding the state unlimited power and discretion. Serious reflection is required to ensure we are not falling down a slippery slope that allows the bypassing of human rights. Freedom of the press, as with our other constitutionally-protected human rights, cannot be discounted and must continue to be treated as a core part of democracy. Despite disappointment with the Court’s decision in R v Vice Media, there is hope that these

ihrp.law.utoronto.ca/page/rights-review-magazine

essential democratic rights will be better protected in the future. The Journalistic Sources Protection Act, SC 2017, c 22 – or the federal shield law – assented to in October 2017, amends the Canada Evidence Act and protects the confidentiality of journalistic sources. This Act was not considered in R v Vice Media as it was not enacted when the authorizing judge made his decision. Going forward, journalists may have legislative recourse to protect their confidential sources. In the preamble, the Act stipulates that journalists cannot be forced to disclose information or documentation that may identify a journalistic source unless there is no other reasonable means and the administration of justice interest outweighs the interest in preserving confidentiality of journalistic sources (JSPA, SC 2017, c 22, Preamble). The conditional language suggests that the State may still have means to apply the “untouchable threshold” of national security interests, but the prioritization of journalists’ rights is clearer. We will see how the Court decides to interpret this shield law when the upcoming case involving Radio Canada journalist Marie-Maude Denis and her investigation of corruption in Quebec is decided by the SCC. Since Ms. Denis’s investigation involved confidential sources, the shield laws may apply and might suggest a different balancing decision than that of R v Vice Media. Ms. Molnar holds that Denis’s case is “an opportunity to see what the Court will do…to clarify [or backslide further].” As a final note to our conversation, Ms. Ewen highlighted her disappointment with the SCC’s decision in R v Vice Media and strongly held that it is not a decision worthy of Canada or of any respected democracy. She expressed hope that 2019 will give the Government the opportunity to get things right and noted that RSF will be adapting their ranking of Canada on the 2018 Press Freedom Index. If Canada wishes to stay in the top 20 of this Index, they must change the path they appear to be following. Ms. Molnar concluded by noting how easy it is to backslide. She emphasized that “we cannot take freedom of expression for granted.”

rightsreview

ultravires.ca

RIGHTS REVIEW

January 30, 2019 | 13

HUMAN RIGHTS PANEL: TECHNOLOGICAL EXPERIMENTS IN THE DIGITAL AGE By Chelsey Legge (4L JD/MPP) On January 14, an all-female panel of experts convened at the Faculty of Law to discuss the human rights implications of new technologies and their use by states and public agencies around the world. Jointly hosted by Human Rights Watch Canada and the International Human Rights Program (IHRP), “Technological Experiments in the Digital Age: Artificial Intelligence, Internet Freedoms, and the State” drew a sold-out crowd in the Moot Court Room. The panel was also livestreamed on Facebook with the video already viewed over 5,000 times. Farida Deif (moderator), Canada Director at Human Rights Watch, began by discussing the power of the internet and social media as tools for the expression and sharing of ideas, including by activists and, increasingly, by the victims of human rights violations (see the recent case of Rahaf Mohammed, an 18-year-old Saudi woman who was granted asylum in Canada after sharing her story on Twitter from her hotel room in Bangkok, Thailand). On the other hand, Deif said, “fearing the power of new technologies, many authoritarian states have devised ways to filter, monitor and disrupt internet freedom.” At the same time, governments are increasingly experimenting with new technology, such as artificial intelligence (AI). Deif said the central question is, “How do we ensure that human rights are front and centre in these conversations?” Petra Molnar, technology and human rights researcher at the IHRP and co-author of the report Bots at the Gate: A Human Rights Analysis of Automated Decision-Making in Canada’s Immigration and Refugee System, discussed the human rights impact of new technology such as AI and machine learning in the immigration space. “Any time you are trying to augment or replace a human immigration officer, there is a real impact on real people’s lives,” said Molnar. “Now is a unique time to speak across sectors about these issues, the ramifications of these technologies, and how we’re going to move forward.” Irene Poetranto, senior researcher at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, discussed the Lab’s research on cyber security from a human rights perspective, including censorship, content filtering, and the role of algorithms. When it comes to algorithms, she said “the fundamental issue is that there is a lack of accountability and transparency [in] how these algorithms are put together.” She identified three major areas of concern: First, the securitization of cyberspace – justified by reference to threats of state-sponsored espionage, cyber crime, and terrorism – risks infringing basic human rights, especially freedom of expression. Second, as more people become connected, particularly in states with weak rule of law and a lack of good governance, more individuals and civil society organizations are vulnerable to digital attacks. Third, new technologies are extending the reach of the state; in Ethiopia, for example, government censorship and surveillance affects not only citizens but members of the Ethiopian diaspora community as well. Cynthia Wong, senior researcher on internet and human rights at Human Rights Watch, stressed the importance of anticipating “how technology is going to impact our ability to enjoy human rights.” She explained that China is at the cutting edge of harmful uses of technology. For example, the Chinese government intends to implement a social credit system, where citizens are given a score indicating their trustworthiness based on algorithms that analyse massive amounts of personal data. “It is truly one of the most Orwellian applications of technology,” said Wong. China also hopes to inte-

ihrprightsreview

THE ESTEEMED PANEL OF EXPERTS IN THE GREEN ROOM JUST PRIOR TO THE EVENT. (FROM LEFT TO RIGHT) CYNTHIA WONG, IRENE POETRANTO, AND PETRA MOLNAR. PHOTO CREDIT: SAMER MUSCATI (‘02)

grate voice recognition technology into mobile phones. Wong noted that Chinese companies are not the only companies enabling these repressive applications of technology; international companies like Facebook and Google are working to create censored versions of their websites and search engines so they can access the considerable Chinese market. Deif then engaged the panellists in a thoughtful discussion about AI, surveillance, and internet freedom. She asked Molnar whether she sees the trends identified in Bots at the Gate in other countries. Molnar confirmed that many countries are turning to emerging technologies to manage migrants and refugees. “Internationally, we’re seeing a proliferation of technology at the border.” In some European airports (Latvia, Hungary, and Greece), governments are rolling out AI lie detectors. Molnar asked, “How is this going to work, exactly? Will these machines be able to take into account cultural differences in communication, [or] the impacts of trauma on communication and memory?” She added that these technologies force us to reckon with basic issues like informed consent. For instance, refugees in Jordanian refugee camps must submit to retinal scanning to access the sums they receive as aid from the World Food Program. “If you get your retina scanned, you get to eat. It’s quite coercive.” Deif asked the panellists whether a computer could be programmed to be less biased than an individual. Molnar responded, “We know there are really complex problems with human decision-

making. The issue here is that we need to get away from thinking about technology as something that is neutral.” She explained that technology is very capable of replicating existent inequalities. “Really, it’s not neutral at all. It’s a social construct, just like law, just like policy, just like language.” The conversation shifted to the effects of AI on our perceptions of fairness and accountability. Molnar noted that “the stakes are really high, especially when we’re experimenting with technology in an opaque space like migration.” Wong implored the audience to think about error rates. “Facial recognition [technologies] misidentify racial and ethnic minorities at a higher rate.” She noted that several studies have found racial and gender biases in AI technologies; for instance, one system designed to analyse emotions consistently rated black faces as more angry and unhappy than white faces. Deif asked the panellists whether they are seeing a rise in ‘digital authoritarianism.’ Wong responded, “Especially after the Arab Spring, governments have been trying to bend the internet towards greater political and social control. China is really the leader in this, [but we see it] replicated in Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere.” Poetranto noted that a lot of surveillance technologies originate in the West and are then marketed throughout the world with few restrictions – for example, the Canadian-manufactured NetSweeper. “The concern is that there is a race to the bottom when it comes to cyber security.” Wong added that surveillance laws should be written as though the governments we most fear are in power. “Maybe

ihrp.law.utoronto.ca/page/rights-review-magazine

you trust your current government, but a new government is only one election away.” Finally, Deif noted that human rights are generally not front and centre in the decision-making processes of technology companies. She asked how we might change that. Molnar responded, “The key is thinking about human rights right from the outset. This includes [incorporating human rights] education in engineering and coding programs.” Wong agreed, and stressed the importance of “breaking down the silos between the human rights communities and the tech communities.” One question from the audience asked about the relationship between smart home technology and domestic violence. Poetranto spoke about technology becoming more affordable and ubiquitous, and how this opens new avenues for threats and harassment. “We’re seeing ‘smart abuse.’ It’s becoming more and more difficult for those being targeted by perpetrators to find a sense of safety, because now there are multiple avenues for access.” She said the problem begins in the design phase. “It’s important for those who are making applications and different types of technology to recognize how they can be used for abusive purposes.” Questions continued to pour in after the event ended, both in-person and online. The panellists were delighted with the high level of interest and engagement. You can check out the discussion on Twitter, at #HumanRightsTECHTO and #BotsAtTheGate.

rightsreview

14 | January 30, 2019

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

New Code, More Problems Bill C-75’s effect on access to justice LIAM THOMPSON (2L) Bill C-75 is a criminal justice omnibus bill. It was introduced by the Liberal Government in the March of 2018, and has made its way on to the Senate as of December. The Bill introduces many changes to the Criminal Code, one of which is an effort to combat the time pressures imposed upon the state by R v Jordan, 2016 SCC 27. Some of these are arguably beneficial, such as eliminating peremptory challenges in jury trials. Other more concerning changes include allowing the Crown to introduce written police evidence concerning very broadly defined ‘routine matters’ and forcing the defence to apply to cross-examine officers on this written evidence. One change may have a particularly disturbing impact: the maximum penalty for all summary conviction offences will be raised from six months to two years imprisonment. Now, this fact alone would be no great cause for concern. Summary conviction of-

fences and hybrid offences make up most of the Code. But, in operation with another section, it would leave many individuals without representation in criminal proceedings against them. Section 802.1 of the Code states that law students can appear as agents for individuals, but only when those individuals are charged with an offence whose maximum penalty is no more than six months imprisonment. Effectively, this would gut the Criminal Division of Downtown Legal Services (DLS) and similar programs across most of the country. Services such as these are vital in ensuring that the criminal justice system operates as justly as it can. Legal Aid certif icates to hire private criminal defence lawyers are only available when the Crown is seeking jail time—and, seeing as legal clinics that are not aff iliated with law schools do not handle criminal matters at all, this would leave those charged with summary conviction offences

for which the Crown is not seeking imprisonment to fend for themselves against the overwhelming might of the state. Unrepresented individuals are by and large unfamiliar with the strictures of the criminal law. They may maintain that they acted in self-defence when their admissions of the facts do not support the defence as def ined in s. 34 of the Code. They will be unlikely to mount Charter arguments despite violations of their rights that would be an immediate red f lag to a law student. Unrepresented accused may also be tempted to simply plead guilty without regard to their actual guilt or innocence in an attempt to get the proceedings over with. In short, their rights to full answer and defence would be irrevocably prejudiced. While it is hardly controversial to say so, I think that any world where accused individuals are denied what protections they do have is a worse one. The system is set up

with the often-erroneous assumption that the accused will have effective counsel— any change that would push more people to face the state without representation thus ought to be avoided. Fortunately, there is a solution. The Lieutenant Governor of a province can issue an order exempting law students from the strictures of s. 802.1. This could be done in such a way that carries out the original intent of the law (that serious matters ought not be handed to those who have not yet been called to the bar) while simultaneously ensuring that all of those who depend on clinics such as DLS are not deprived of representation. To all those who feel similarly, I would encourage you to write your local MPP and correspondingly encourage them to support such an order. Doing so would help to ensure a more just Ontario for everyone. And that is a state of affairs that needs no defence.

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

January 30, 2019 | 15

Date Spots for Valentine’s Day Dinner Surprise that special someone by handing them the cheque DARYNA KUTSYNA (2L) Contrar y to Dickens’ eternal w isdom, Februar y is probably the worst month for law students. The 1L recruit drags on, either w ith a steady dr ip of PFOs or by hav ing to g ive up your reading week to attend in-f irm inter v iews. Moot run-throughs take a chunk of time out of an already reading-packed schedule. Oh, and it feels like -25º C when you f inally crawl out of Bora Lask in, long past sunset. But in all this, there’s a br ight spot: on Valentine’s Day restaurants boast special menus and romantic festiv ities are more than enough justif ication to take a night of f for even the most dedicated student. So, grab your bae (or your foodie fr iend), and head to any of these spots for a night away from Tor y’s Hall.

Constantine

George

15 Charles Street East (at Yonge Street) (647) 475 - 4436

111 Queen Street East (at Jar v is Street) (647) 496 - 8275

A new arr ival in the school neighborhood, Constantine was conceptualized by the team behind Dundas West favor ite La Palma. The menu is a blend of Italian and M iddle Eastern cuisines, w ith special features available for Valentine’s Day. A w ine pair ing option is also available, if you’re look ing to indulge.

Located a convenient, ten-minute walk from the f inancial distr ict, this one is great for sneak ing away to dinner straight from work. For the occasion, the chef has prepared a four-course dinner menu, which, combined w ith an extensive list of w ine pair ings, w ill def initely make for a memorable night.

Bar Isabel

Sassafraz

797 College Street (at Ossing ton Avenue) (416) 532-2222

10 0 Cumberland Street (at Bay Street) (416) 964 -2222

This cozy nook in L itt le Italy may be pr icey, but it’s worth it for mak ing you feel like you’re on a vacation in Spain for a night. The space is dimly lit and romantic, and the cocktails are to die for. Bar Isabel is also known for A+ ser v ice that’s sure to impress on a special night.

A nother favor ite near the school, this spot boasts amazing cocktails and stellar desserts. If you feel like linger ing around after your meal, you can move to the S Café for a more lounge feel. This is also a great option if you have to move your celebrator y plans a day up—Lady Be Good w ill be play ing on the 15th, which w ill help you make it up to your date for your erratic schedule.

Top 7 Reasons to Have a Baby in Law School ALEXANDRA MCLENNAN BROWN (3L) If you’ve ever bumped into me at the law school, I’ve likely banged on about how great it is to have a child in law school. I started law school when my elder son was three months old. I did my first year part-time (i.e., over two years) and then had my second son at the beginning of 2L. I am graduating this year. My sons are now 3.5 and 1.5 years old. I am very happy to have had two children while in law school. That said, my experience has been so positive because I have a supportive partner who co-parents 100%. Of course, there are stressful moments, days, and weeks. What follows is a list of some of the highlights.

8:30 am Classes No Longer Feel Early

Nor do 10:30 am classes for that matter. I wake up somewhere between 5 am and 6 am. 8:30 am is practically lunchtime.

A Regular schedule

I can’t say this was true when my children were at their smallest, and our routine can often shift. That said, children naturally demand regularity, and law school provides a certain amount of regularity that my undergraduate degree did not. We wake up early, eat breakfast, play and go to daycare. I work from approximately 9 am–4 pm (or later during exams). I pick them up from daycare. We eat, play, and go to bed. I might work again.

Efficiency

When I say work, I (tend to) work hard. Because there isn’t a lot of time, I don’t waste a lot of time. This is a skill I have had to develop over the past 3.5 years.

Non-Law School Friends

I’ve heard advice that you should make friends outside of law school. My friends are currently a chubby little 1- and 3-year old. Maybe I should get out more…

Exercise

Children move a lot. When they are awake, I basically don’t stop moving.

Focus

Everyone is focussed and driven at law school. Since having children, I have gained a new kind of focus. For example, before I applied for, and took, a job with a Bay St. law firm, I seriously questioned if it was what I wanted. Was is right for me? Was it right for my family?

Improved Learning Skills

Do you remember a time in school when every child in the class was waving their hand in an effort to answer the teacher’s question? My oneyear-old falls on his bum trying to walk or run about 100 times a day. My three-year-old slows down and trips over words when he’s trying to explain something new. My children have taught me how to make mistakes, and dare I say, learn.

16 | January 30, 2019

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

I Want a Life Outside Law School A 1L perspective TENG RONG (1L)

Towards the end of the f irst week, I began to feel over whelmed. It was after a week of non-stop activ ities: Legal Methods dur ing the day, social gather ings in the evening, readings at night, mandator y meetings over the weekend. Standalone, ever y event was per fect ly enjoyable. W hen I combined them, however, I got this sickening feeling that ever y moment of my wak ing life revolved around law school. This feeling never truly went away. A s September rolled in, the readings piled up, the events were replaced by clubs, and the weekend gather ings became assignments. L ife and law school became an unholy chimera of stress and emptiness (w ith the eternal words of LJ Denning spr ink led on top). I remember think ing, "Old Peter Besw ick signed away his coal business ... did I sign away my life?" I come from a STEM background. Eng i-

neer ing, to be precise. It was a grotesquely large program w ith over 250 0 students at any g iven time. Ever y class was held in 40 0 -student lecture halls f illed to the br im. It was intensely impersonal: nobody stayed after class to ask questions; nobody joined eng ineer ing-related clubs; nobody went to speaker-events unless there was an explicit g uarantee of free pizza. In other words, it allowed for a fully compartmentalized life that gave me the option to pursue meaning ful things beyond eng ineer ing. W hen my future career didn't depend on my membership in clubs, I had the freedom to start businesses and run companies. W hen my life achievement wasn't judged on the qualit y of summer employment, I had the opportunit y to explore my interests while mak ing ends meet. I was a technical wr iter for one summer, a web developer for another, and a start-up

founder for yet another. Still, I found internship, I graduated, and I am just as employable as an eng ineer as anyone else. Is it too much to want the same in law school? Law school is for extroverts. Those who f it in are those who speak up in class, those who enjoy participating, and those who are itching to leave the house to do stuf f. But what about ever yone else? A ll of us introverts and ambiverts, the literal silent major it y, what must we do to properly enjoy our three years here? This I do not know. I do know one thing, however: the answer isn't to f ill our ever y wak ing minute w ith law-school-related things. We need a healthy school-life balance. School here, life there, and a healthy semi-permeable membrane in between. Go home, paint, sing, wr ite for U V, do whatever it is that you do to feel like your-

self again. Sell Shamwows door-to-door in the summer. Trade penny stocks at 9:30A M ever y weekday. Go ham at AYCE sushi. L ife is more than what belongs on a resumé. Remember that you are study ing law out of genuine interest. A job is nice, and it may even be the end goal, but if the result were to replace the journey, then ever yone would be tak ing screenshots of Google street v iew. I realized something in November, and thank fully it was not too late: not ever y club requires participation, not ever y job posting demands stress, and not ever y event implores attendance. I can choose to participate in things that spark my interest. I can choose to have free time. W ho I am is not "a law student". I am an indiv idual who happens to be study ing law—and I want a life outside law school.

Put Word Counts on Exams

Perspectives from exchange NORM YALLEN (3L) W hen I was on exchange in Geneva this past semester, I had the opportunit y to approach school in a dif ferent way. I could tell you about all the exper iences I had and all that jazz, but I want to make a simpler point here. In Geneva, most exams were 15 -minute oral exams, which was a much more pleasant exper ience than exams in Toronto. I would get 15 minutes to prepare an answer to a prompt, then 15 minutes to present the answer to a professor. This was a welcome break from Toronto, where ever y law exam is simply an opportunit y to spend three hours t y ping as much as possible. The way exams work at this school is inconsistent. W hen we have papers, there is a word limit. Students are forced to decide what information is important enough to include and demonstrate their understanding w ithin that limit. The same is true of take-home exams. Yet for most standard

three-hour exams, there is no word limit. Most law exam questions have no clear answer, incentiv izing students to wr ite as much as they can. There is clear incentive to cover ever y possibilit y in order to demonstrate to a professor that the student wr iting deser ves a higher grade. A n 80 0 0 word exam therefore allows for more opportunit y to demonstrate understanding and master y of the course than a 40 0 0 word exam. There are certainly exceptions to this but, all else equal, the exam w ith more content is likely going to do better. A nyone who disagrees can feel free to wr ite less and see what happens. A lthough I would prefer the 15 -minute oral exam format, I am certain that U of T w ill not accommodate this. However, the t y ping contests should end. A ll exams should have a def ined word limit in the same way that papers and take-home exams do. In the past, exams were handwr it-

ten, which I think explains the current discrepancy. However, today we have an amazing software program that usually works and can tell people what their word count is on exams. A s I am wr iting this, I now realize there would be students at this school who pur posefully handwr ite to avoid a word count… Damn them. Law school here is hard and stressful. There are some things that can’t be changed, such as the competition for marks, jobs, and whatever else people are into these days. With that competitive mindset, I always approached exams in Toronto w ith the goal to wr ite as much as possible. Going away on exchange allowed me to see that there can be more to law school than competition. There should also be more to exams than simply the volume wr itten. The content of the exam should be what matters, not the number of words on the page.

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

January 30, 2019 | 17

In Vino Veritas Exquisite, ebullient effervescence TOM COLLINS (2L) Sometimes, I wonder if people associate Champagne w ith celebrations because there is something exhilarating about popping a cork and spray ing foam all over the place, or simply because it is so expensive that people cannot justify dr ink ing it except on special occasions. If you are a student, then you probably cannot af ford decent Champagne at all. But, that does not mean that you cannot celebrate w ith some f ine f izz! Februar y is f illed w ith toast-worthy occasions: Black Histor y Month, the Lunar New Year is on the 5th, Valentine’s Day the 14th, and some of you stars w ill land jobs through the 1L recruit. Of course, there are those more minor v ictor ies, too: getting out of bed, being civ il for more

than two consecutive hours, not texting that fuckboy. That is why we rev iewed some more af fordable bubbly beverages you can use to enhance any occasion. You deser ve it.

Tom

Long-time readers w ill know that I love Champagne. Bollinger Special Cuvée is one of my favour ite dr inks. It is a phenomenal bott le, but at $84.95 a ( literal) pop, it is reser ved for only the most momentous occasions. That is why I was thr illed to discover Peller Estates Ice Cuvée, a local spark ling white which, as its name suggests, is “ k issed” w ith a litt le bit of Niagara ice w ine to add sweetness. That oenolog ical romance is mag ic. This VQA w ine

is a real pleasure to dr ink. It opens to notes of apples, peaches, lemon, honey and—bear w ith me—the scent of a man who has just worked up a sweat wrest ling w ith some heav y furniture. With the exception of that last fragrance, most of those aromas carr y through into the palate. Citrus leads the way followed by apples and stone fruit. A s the f ine, frothy, and persistent f izz subsided, I also tasted almond br ioche on what turned out to be a remarkably long and sweet f inish. The w ine is slight ly sweet, medium-bodied, and w ith a balanced acidit y that makes it easy to pair w ith just about anything light and creamy or sweet and spicy. At $34.95, it is still a special occasion bott le, but it is also great value for spark ling w ine.

Kimia

If you really love popping bott les, then you should get acquainted w ith Veuve A mbal Crémant de Bourgogne Grande Cuvée Brut. This creamy Burg undian bubbly is supremely dr inkable and tast y. The aromas of lemon and melon are apparent w ith pear and baked apple notes also coming through. The taste is dr y, yet soft and smooth, w ith balanced acidit y and leng th. There are notes of minerals, apples, and grapefruits. Refreshing! It would pair well w ith all classic Champagne dishes, such as oysters, trout, or cav iar, and at the pr ice of only $19.55 at the LCBO, it is def initely a great substitute for Champagne.

In Cannabis Veritas

Get blunted, and other New Year’s resolutions TOM COLLINS (2L) Someone recent ly told me that New Year’s resolut ions are bad for your menta l hea lth. Apparent ly, they set you up for d isappointment. Maybe the problem is just that people set unrea list ic goa ls. I a lready k now that I’m not going to go to the g y m, and that I am going to get enough Ps to make my transcr ipt look like a Yorkshire pub menu. So, this year, my resolut ions focus on things that I can achieve, like not worr ying so much about what I can’t. Cannabis is going to play a key role in that plan. I’m not say ing that dr ugs are the solut ion to my problems, but I am hoping that they can help g ive me the perspect ive I need to f ind the solut ions. If you are feeling the same way, then

keep read ing. I have again procured some suggest ions, from t wo of the school’s most k nowledgeable tokers, of how to temporar ily relieve some stress, so that you can get back to what you need to do.

Dankenstein

Pink Cocoa is a cross between Pink Kush and Chocolate Kush, two powerful indica strains. Out of the bag, it shares its parents’ charming, woody base notes, as well as their sweeter hints, but it is noticeably quieter. The f lavour prof ile is also a fusion of its parents’. Spicy, dark chocolate and tobacco dominate, but the Pink Kush also contributes its caustic, peppery, cherry character. Indeed, Pink Cocoa seems like the obvious offspring of two well-loved

strains — until it takes effect. P ink Cocoa is not quite as quick to act as straight P ink Kush, but neither is it a slouch. Within f ive minutes of f inishing my joint, it was a cha l lenge just to wa lk back up the suddenly water-ba l loon-stairs to my apartment. Ever y thing took on this lug ubr ious, lava-lamp qua lit y as I fumbled w ith my phone to put on Er ic Ding us’s remix of that M ike Jones classic, “St il l Tippin”—“chopped & screwed” suddenly made per fect sense as a musica l subgenre. I do not believe that I have ever had such a complete, cor porea l, and menta l high. The v isua ls were a lso spectacular. It was like being spun slowly around a ka leidoscope. P ink Cocoa is not yet available through

the OCS but expect it to command about $12 per g ram.

Puff the Magic Dragon

If you enjoy music as much as I do, W hite Widow is where it’s at. This is a hybr id, sat iva-dominant strain that turns ord inar y music into a 3 -D listening exper ience bet ween your ears. Be sure to choose the W hite Widow produced by Redecan in the OCS for $10.05 per g ram. Not a l l of the OCS weed is equa l in qua lit y; Redecan is one of the better brands. Rol l it up, take a couple puf fs, and w ithin seconds you’l l enjoy a brand-new perspect ive on your favour ite music. A nd when it’s a l l over, you’l l be ready for one of the most peaceful sleeps you could ask for.

18 | January 30, 2019

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

What I Did on Exchange: McDonald's Rankings When the Bloor St location just doesn’t hit the spot NORM YALLEN (3L)

CHRIS KLEPONIS/POOL/GETTY IMAGES. MODIFIED BY JEREMIE LACHANCE (3L).

Going abroad for a semester presents an opportunity for all sorts of new experiences and sensations. I know that I certainly made the most of my time in Europe, and, if any students have any questions about exchange, they can try to chase me down. They will not succeed. Being in Europe let me try all sorts of dif ferent fare, from the Value Menu to those fancy burgers that everyone feels kind of weird getting because that’s not really the point of McDonald’s. Without further adieu, here is my Supervised Upper Year Research Paper (if any admin reading this wants to toss me a credit and a P, I’ll take it).

10. Switzerland

The food is f ine if you like paying around twenty euros for a cheeseburger. Everyone involved in customer service in this country seemed to be taunting me at all times, and they likely were because every consumer transaction in this country is a scam.

9. Hungary

The McDonald’s was bad, mainly because it didn’t have a touchpad, and so I had to try to f igure out what to order with a person and panicked. Exchange is about expanding your horizons. I tried to make a pun about Hungary but concluded that we are all better than that.

8. Spain

The McDonald’s here was f ine, but, honestly, this was the one place where I felt dumb ordering McDonald’s because I could get tapas and feign a Spanish accent. That is an opportunity not to be missed.

7. France

Did you know that in France they call a Quarter Pounder a Royale with Cheese? Yeah, that’s right, I saw Pulp Fiction. It is safe to say that as a twenty-four-year-old male who has seen Pulp Fiction, I am interesting and unique.

6. Czech Republic/Slovakia

When will these two f inally realize that all they ever wanted was right in front of them and just get back together for the sake of the children?

5. Belgium

Honestly, I just kind of forgot about this country. I guess middle of the pack seems about right?

4. England

It is not so much that the McD’s was particularly good here or anything. More that the food in this country is vile. Meat pies, mushy peas, bacon buns—did somebody hurt you England?

3. Italy

The only thing keeping Italy from a higher spot is that when I tried to order the gabagool, I just got weird looks and blank stares. I guess the people there have not watched T he Sopranos, which is yet another thing that makes me interesting and unique.

2. Netherlands

Let’s just say, it was good (insert lazy stoner joke here. Just kidding I would never do anything like that).

1. Germany

The biggest menu, the most interesting items, and all delivered with that trademark German ef f iciency.

OPINIONS

20 | January 30, 2019

DIVERSIONS

Various Opiates of the Law School Masses The soul of soulless conditions LILY HASSALL (3L) Being a law student has its perks. But, do we really benef it from them? Or, are they just distractions from our eternal suf fer ing and subjugation? The next time you encounter one of these so-called panaceas, think tw ice.

5. The f loor-to-ceiling windows in the law library. Sure, these expensive installations g ive us natural light, but do you know what’s better than the illusion of being outside? Actually being outside. Wake up, sheeple! These w indows are the walls of our pr ison!

4. Yak’s Snacks. A nyone who has tr ied these decoy “snacks” knows that they are litt le more than sweet and salt y poison. A nd the cof fee? Let’s just say the “ Yak” knows we need caf feine if we’re going to push for land redistr ibution, and he’s not going to g ive it to us.

3. Actual opiates. Ser iously, drug abuse and mental health issues are both enormous problems in the legal profession. There should be more awareness around these issues.

2. Awareness campaigns about issues in the legal profession W hat has “awareness” actually done for anyone lately? If your campaign isn’t asking for mater ial policy changes, or, ideally, a bloody revolutionar y putsch, it’s probably just a distraction.

1. Raising tuition by 4% instead of 5%. It’s a $40 0 dif ference. This joke tells itself.

ultravires.ca

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

January 30, 2019 | 21

Rom-Coms to Watch on Valentine’s Day (alone, with a bottle of merlot) Or bodacious red, if you prefer… In Vino Veritas isn’t around to judge you DARYNA KUTSYNA (2L) Februar y is the worst month. It’s freezing cold, there’s nothing left of the holiday spir it (320 days till Chr istmas doesn’t really have a r ing to it), and the sting from the 1L recruit PFOs hasn’t quite subsided yet. A nd to top it of f, all your fr iends are going out for dinner dates and the closest thing you have to romantic contact is avoiding your classmates on Tinder. But not to despair: Ultra Vires’ Valentine’s day mov ie list (and copious amounts of w ine) can still save your night! Read below to pick the mov ie that’ll best match your mood.

Ghosted by your Bumble date: “He’s Just Not That Into You” She didn’t text you for four days but that just means she’s really busy w ith work, r ight? ( Wrong). In the absence of a fr iend to tell you to get back to sw iping, get that same solid adv ice from A lex the bartender.

Married to your grades: “Legally Blonde” Channel your inner Elle Woods after she realizes she’ll never be “good enough” for Warner as you start prepar ing summar ies before reading week. Love may be f ick le, but nothing is more reliable than a transcr ipt full of HHs.

Your trusty Galentine has a SO now: “27 Dresses”

Settling into the single life: “How to be Single”

Yeah, you’re the only single person in your fr iend group and per petually third-wheeling dates, but at least you didn’t spend thousands of dollars on a closet of dresses that you’ll never wear again.

This one is k ind of self-explanator y. A lso, Robin’s hard-dr ink ing habits and abilit y to show up to work after part y ing until the wee hours of the morning are almost g uaranteed to make you feel really good about yourself.

You’re in law school and bae is in another city: “Going the Distance”

You’re in a happy, fulfilling relationship:

W hether bae is in a dif ferent time zone, out of town for work, or just goes to Osgoode ( basically a dif ferent cit y), you can console yourself w ith the fact that you don’t have to share the w ine tonight.

Wait, why are you reading this? A lso, if your company for the night is a bott le of Bodacious, are you sure?

22 | January 30, 2019

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

Rejected 1L Exam Questions The third in a series GABRIELLE MCLAUGHLIN (2L)

TORTS: Anselm, a 63-year old specialist in cheese-husbandr y, danced down the steps of his house on the morning of March 19, determined to spend the day punching Bartholomew, a black bear, in the gut. “Nothing will stop me from checking this bear-punching of f my to-do list!” he called to his disinterested neighbour, Drusilla, who rolled her eyes and continued to peruse the recruitment website for the CI A. The moment Anselm’s feet hit the pavement in front of his house, a meteor fell from the sky and killed him instantly. Undeterred, after only a couple of hours lying dead on the pavement, Anselm brushed himself of f and called out, “I am of f to punch Bartholomew!” to Drusilla, but Drusilla was no longer on her porch. Drusilla had left the moment the meteor hit: she had plans to get drunk with Bartholomew at the town dump. When Anselm arrived at the dump, Bartholomew was waiting for him. Bartholomew was still reeling from the moonshine he and Drusilla had shared. A lso, he is a bear, and they always look slightly drunk. Being dead, Anselm was unsure how to proceed. He readied his f ists, and Bartholomew ate him. Clara was passing the dump in her car when she witnessed Anselm’s legs disappearing into Bartholomew’s mouth. She has not been able to sleep since: she claims that the thought of Bartholomew’s poor tummy tr ying to digest Anselm’s unfortunate footwear choice was keeping her awake and causing her to lose clients in her job as a person who is not always awake.

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

January 30, 2019 | 23

Intra Vires January Update Totally real news from around the law school HONGHU WANG (2L)

Watergate-gate Wrecks Havoc

E.legalgate

Law Games Social Recap

Water supply was temporar ily disabled in the Jackman Law Building after a watergate supply ing the school failed. Intra Vires f irst received reports of this incident from a whist leblower identify ing themselves by an explicit sexual act. IV has decided not to republish their alias to comply w ith the IV journalistic integr it y pr inciples.

A fter this year’s e.legal meltdown, e.legal w ill be discontinued next year as the school transitions to the happiness maximization system. [Editor’s note: praise be to the happiness maximization system]. Next month’s I V w ill be a reworked version of “Candle in the Wind” memor ializing ever yone’s third favour ite online law school ser v ice.

Twent y students from the law school recent ly traveled to Sherbrooke, Quebec to compete in the annual Law Games. W hile failing miserably in the athletic competitions, IV has learned that the students achieved astounding success in the social events. Unfortunately, our correspondent was hav ing way too sick a time to tell any of you about it. Congratulations to the team, you all should be ashamed of yourselves.

Separately, the Students’ Law Societ y of f ices were raided by the administration in what appears to be a totally unrelated incident. IV has learned of secret recordings from the Dean’s Of f ice author izing the raids according to sources close to the Dean. No word on whether the same explicit sexual act was involved in this raid.

Vending Machine Cues Chaos; Students Scrambling for Coke

A s the great Er ic Clapton once said, “she don’t lie, she don’t lie, she don’t lie [Ginger A le].”

DIVERSIONS

24 | January 30, 2019

ultravires.ca

BY: SHARI NATHAN (3L)

Merit is everything. If you’re talented and do great work, we have a place for you. Reach out to our students to learn more.

John Aziz Class of 2020

Katrina Brazzell Class of 2018

Andrew Helsdon Class of 2019

Kimberly Legate Class of 2020

Kate Mazzuocco Class of 2020

Alisa McMaster Class of 2018

Maura O’Sullivan Class of 2018

Patrick Pang Class of 2018

Nick Principato Class of 2020

Samantha Rosenthal Class of 2020

Timothy Shin Class of 2019

Nicholas Tomazos Class of 2019

dwpv.com/students

@daviesstudents