Category: State Responses to Violence Page 9 of 12

Case considered: R. v. J.A., 2011 SCC 28

Can a person consent in advance to sexual activity that occurs while she is unconscious? A majority of the Supreme Court of Canada recently answered this question in the negative in R. v. J.A., 2011 SCC 28, taking the same approach as a majority of the Alberta Court of Appeal in R. v. Ashlee, 2006 ABCA 244. There were strong dissents in each case, however, indicating that the resolution of this issue is far from obvious for some judges. Also interesting is that judges on both sides of the issue frame their analyses in terms of the sexual autonomy of the complainant, and see their decisions as consistent (or at least not inconsistent) with the leading Supreme Court of Canada authority on consent, R. v. Ewanchuk, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 330. This comment will discuss the J.A. and Ashlee decisions and assess the merits of the different reasons for decision in light of the applicable statutory provisions and case law and the courts’ attention (or lack thereof) to context.

Interim Report on Violence Against Aboriginal Women Released

By Jennifer Koshan

On April 29, 2011

In Aboriginal, International Law, State Responses to Violence

PDF version: Interim Report on Violence Against Aboriginal Women Released

Report Commented on: House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women Interim Report, Call Into The Night: An Overview of Violence Against Aboriginal Women

Just before the House of Commons was dissolved for the election, the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women tabled its Interim Report, Call Into The Night: An Overview of Violence Against Aboriginal Women. In a news release, the Honourable Hedy Fry, Chair of the Committee, stated as follows: “It is rare that an all party Committee displays such unanimity, urgency and passion in getting its message out. All members were so astounded and overwhelmed by the systemic, institutionalised nature of the violence against Aboriginal women that we wanted to make sure, this time, that their voices will be heard; that their cries for help and the hope which these hopeless and desperate women had placed in us was not lost because of an election call.” I blogged on the Committee’s Edmonton hearing back in January, focusing on the lack of attention the study was receiving in the media. The silence around violence against Aboriginal women is also identified as a major issue in the Committee’s Interim Report (at 3-4).

Protection Against Family Violence Act Amended

By Jennifer Koshan

On April 7, 2011

In State Responses to Violence

PDF version: Protection Against Family Violence Act Amended

Legislation commented on: Bill 2, Protection Against Family Violence Amendment Act, 2011, S.A. 2011 c.4

Bill 2, the Protection Against Family Violence Amendment Act, 2011, makes several important changes to the Protection Against Family Violence Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. P-27 (PAFVA). The Bill, which was supported by all parties in the Alberta Legislature, received Royal Assent on March 18, 2011 and is currently awaiting proclamation. This post will review the major changes the Bill makes to the Act, having regard to the objectives of the framers of the PAFVA, judicial interpretations of the PAFVA, an independent evaluation of the PAFVA, and the legislative debates on the amendments.

Violence Against Aboriginal Women – Is Anyone Listening?

By Jennifer Koshan

On January 31, 2011

In State Responses to Violence

PDF version: Violence Against Aboriginal Women – Is Anyone Listening?

Commented upon: The House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women, Study on Violence Against Aboriginal Women (Standing Order 108(2))

In March 2010, the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women (FEWO) undertook a study on violence against Aboriginal Women. It held meetings in Ottawa in April 2010, and travelled to various communities across Canada in 2010 and early 2011 to hold hearings and meet with interested individuals and organizations. The Committee wrapped up its tour with a visit to Edmonton on January 21, 2011, where I was called as a witness. Sadly, and in spite of receiving a news release related to this and earlier hearings, no one from the media was present in Edmonton, a situation we were told was replicated in the Committee’s other hearings. Although one of the Committee members, Conservative MP Nina Grewal, stated repeatedly during the hearing that violence against Aboriginal women is a “top priority” of the government, the issue does not appear to be getting much attention.

Domestic Violence and Provocation: The Door Remains Open

By Jennifer Koshan

On December 6, 2010

In Criminal, State Responses to Violence, Supreme Court of Canada

PDF version: Domestic Violence and Provocation: The Door Remains Open

Case Considered: R. v. Tran, 2010 SCC 58

The Supreme Court’s most recent decision, R. v. Tran, is an Alberta case I commented on at the Court of Appeal level. Tran involves a man who killed his estranged wife’s lover and slashed his wife’s face, causing her permanent injury. The issue in this case was whether there was provocation arising from the fact that the accused found his wife in bed with her lover, such that he should be convicted of manslaughter rather than second degree murder. In a decision authored by Justice Louise Charron, the Supreme Court agreed with the Alberta Court of Appeal that provocation was not made out in the circumstances of the case, and upheld the accused’s conviction for murder. While this is a positive outcome, in my view the Court did not go far enough in contextualizing this case as one involving domestic violence, nor did it foreclose future uses of the provocation defence in this context.

Category: State Responses to Violence Page 9 of 12

Consciousness and Consent in Sexual Assault Cases

Interim Report on Violence Against Aboriginal Women Released

Protection Against Family Violence Act Amended

Violence Against Aboriginal Women – Is Anyone Listening?

Domestic Violence and Provocation: The Door Remains Open