Restorative justice should have greater weight as a criterion in criminal justice sentencing practice. It permits a realistic recognition of the kinds of harm and damage caused by offences, and encourages individualized non-custodial sentencing options as ways of addressing these harms. Non-custodial sentences have proven more effective than incarceration in securing social reconciliation and preventing recidivism, and they avoid the serious social and personal costs of imprisonment. This paper argues in support of restorative justice as a guiding idea in sentencing. (...) As part of this defence, it considers whether the use of the idea of restorative justice will conflate criminal law with civil law or displace the authority of the criminal courts, and whether the sentences it recommends are best thought of as punishments or alternatives to punishment. (shrink)

My discussion of duress falls into three parts. In part I of the paper, I argue chiefly that Xings done under duress remain clear cases of action, and that they are special cases of acting for a reason. In part II, I propose a five-point analysis of acting under duress. In part III, I examine how duress operates as a defence. I maintain that duress is sometimes an excuse and sometimes a justification for conduct, although I further argue that nevertheless (...) it would not be unreasonable to classify duress as an excuse. (shrink)

Andre Gombay gives a penetrating, accurate account of the functioning of duress as a defence in current Canadian law, and puts forward an intelligent and very appealing suggestion as to how the law on duress might be reformed. As part of the underpinnings for his reform proposals, he attempts to unravel the elements of justification and excuse that intertwine in duress and provides his analysis of how duress is distinguishable from other excuses or defences. I agree with him that the (...) present working conception of duress in law falls far short of its appropriate moral potential as a defence, and I wish in these comments to support his proposals for reform. However, I think his arguments regarding the nature of duress, and its bearing on our responsibility for what we do under duress, are less persuasive, and it is here that I will begin. (shrink)

Canada's Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies rejects all forms of surrogacy arrangement under the rubric of objecting to commercial surrogacy. Noncommercial surrogacy arrangements, however, can be defended against the commission's objections. They can be viewed as cases of giving a benefit or service to another in a way that expresses benevolence, and establishes a relationship between surrogates and prospective 'social' parents that allows mutual understanding and reciprocal personal interaction between them.

RÉSUMÉ: Cet article examine les conséquences pour l’inégalité sexuelle au Canada des coupures gouvernementales dans les soins de santé et les services sociaux, et les évalue à l’aune de la jurisprudence relative à la Charte. L’auteure soutient que ce recul a en fait désavantagé les femmes d’une manière disproportionnée, et qu’on pourrait y voir, du point de vue de la Charte, une discrimination à leur endroit. Or les gouvernements n’ont offert aucune justification de ces effets discriminatoires qui satisferait aux critères (...) de la Charte en en montrant le caractère raisonnable dans une société libre et démocratique. Présenter l’action gouvernementale comme un exercice neutre de transfert de responsabilités vers les familles et les communautés ne saurait constituer une telle justification. (shrink)

RésuméCet article examine les conséquences pour l'inégalité sexuelle au Canada des coupures gouvernementales dans les soins de santé et les services sociaux, et les évalue à I'aune de la jurisprudence relative à la Charte. L'auteure soutient que ce recul a en fait désavantagé les femmes d'une manière disproportionnée, et qu'on pourrait y voir, du point de vue de la Charte, une discrimination à leur endroit. Or les gouvernements n'ont offert aucune justification de ces effets discriminatoires qui satisferait aux critères de (...) la Charte en en montrant le caractère raisonnable dans une société libre et démocratique. Présenter l'action gouvernementale comme un exercice neutre de transfert de responsabilités vers les families et les communautés ne saurait constituer une telle justification. (shrink)