Cet article explore les effets ambivalents des mobilisations juridiques autochtones, dans un contexte de faible État de droit, à partir d’une étude de cas approfondie de la communauté Xákmok Kásek au Paraguay. Malgré une victoire devant la Cour interaméricaine des droits de l’Homme, les résultats matériels restent limités. Toutefois, le recours au droit joue un rôle important en légitimant les luttes et en structurant les actions collectives. L’analyse repose sur un travail de terrain mené à Asunción et dans le Chaco en 2022, incluant quarante-six entretiens, l’étude de documents juridiques et l’accès aux archives d’ONG. Théoriquement, l’article mobilise les travaux sur les mobilisations juridiques dans les régimes hybrides et autoritaires. Il montre que le droit, bien qu’imparfait, peut renforcer la visibilité et la légitimité des revendications. Cette contribution éclaire les usages stratégiques du droit dans des contextes répressifs et invite à reconsidérer ses effets au-delà des victoires formelles.

This article analyzes the parliamentary debates over three Canadian federal laws (2021-2024) on medical assistance in dying (MAID). It explores the factors that influenced Parliament’s decision to expand MAID eligibility to include mental illness in 2021 and to subsequently defer that eligibility on two occasions in 2023 and 2024. We argue that the expansion of MAID to include mental illness was partly driven by a looming judicial deadline and the government’s desire to avoid future Charter litigation, while the deferrals were driven by the perceived lack of readiness from key stakeholders, especially the provinces. This case study identifies broader dynamics of judicial-legislative interaction that can affect policy outcomes, including governments’ attempts at “future-oriented compliance” to pre-empt litigation rather than merely respond to it. It also demonstrates both how judicial deadlines can constrain legislative choice in unforeseen ways and how sunset clauses can foster policy uncertainty.

Processes of repression, criminalization and penalization were importantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Mobilizing data produced through an ethnographic study of plea courts in Ottawa, this article reports on the ways in which lower criminal courts administered what judges described as “COVID justice.” In this transitory form of justice, we observed a) a dilated reward system for guilty pleas; b) the work of the virtual resolution team, a workgroup dedicated to unburdening the courts from backlogs attributed to the pandemic; c) requests to increase the credits granted for time served in locked-down, noxious prisons, and; d) the diversion of sentenced individuals from prison on the grounds of the primacy of public health over criminal justice.

Cet article examine la problématique de la grossophobie en discutant de ses racines comme de ses impacts sur les personnes qui en sont victimes ainsi que sa manifestation au sein du droit. Il explore plus précisément comment le droit et les politiques publiques peuvent perpétuer la stigmatisation des corps, notamment à travers les interventions en matière de saine alimentation. L’étude se concentre sur l’approche environnementale adoptée au Québec pour promouvoir une alimentation saine, en interrogeant sa capacité à éviter la stigmatisation individuelle. S’appuyant sur le cadre théorique des Fat Studies, l’article expose l’argumentation politique des Fat Studies, présente le cadre normatif québécois destiné à la création d’environnements favorables à la saine alimentation, et examine la place accordée au poids corporel dans les politiques publiques québécoises liées à la saine alimentation dans le but d’offrir une perspective critique sur les approches actuelles en santé publique ainsi que leurs impacts sur la perception sociétale de la grosseur.

The Supreme Court of Canada mandates recognition of systemic factors that create barriers for Indigenous peoples’ access to equitable justice. Specifically, R. v. Gladue directs courts to consider the unique circumstances of Indigenous peoples when engaging in decision-making processes in all criminal courts. Drawing from interview data with Indigenous and non-Indigenous defence counsel in Ontario, this study assesses whether and how Gladue factors shape bail hearings. Our findings reveal that the application of Gladue principles exists along a continuum, ranging from mere “lip service”, to the tailoring of bail decisions based on meaningful recognition of systemic disadvantages. We also highlight the importance of lived experience and representation of Indigenous legal actors and the challenges they encounter working within a colonial system. We situate these findings within broader critiques of risk-based bail frameworks and settler colonial legal systems, concluding with policy recommendations and directions for future research.

Human rights systems in Canada face difficulties: growing caseloads, slow case processing, and a lack of access to hearings. Some Canadian jurisdictions have responded to these challenges by changing from a commission system to a direct access system. This change is made to maximize efficiency, to more quickly process complaints, and to render faster justice to all. Using British Columbia, Canada, as a test case, we assess which of these two systems is most efficient at processing complaints by examining annual reports from 1996 to 2022. We analyze which system closed complaints faster and which system screened out and or settled more cases over time. We also determined which system processed more cases in full hearings. We conclude that the commission system was more efficient, it closed more cases and was faster than the direct access system. It also provided a greater chance to have complaints adjudicated in formal hearings.

When it was first introduced, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) had two primary goals of reducing the reliance on custody and increasing uniformity in sentencing practices. Twenty years later, the YCJA has succeeded in dramatically lowering overall rates of youth in custody, but this gain has been selectively experienced by non-Indigenous youth and regional disparities in sentencing practices persist. In this paper, we suggest that the YCJA’s inability to meet its goals is due to overcriminalization by over depth. Using Indigenous youth sentencing as a case study, we argue the YCJA’s layered and sometimes conflicting principles have symptoms of overcriminalization by over depth, including over- and under-inclusiveness, arbitrariness, and confusion in implementation. To more effectively meet the YCJA’s initial goals, we propose legislative streamlining and systemic reforms, including specialized Indigenous youth courts and enhanced community-based resources, as pathways to greater justice.

Surety supervision is one of the most onerous bail conditions imposed on legally innocent people pretrial. Sureties are generally family or friends who promise a sum of money and agree to supervise the accused, enforcing conditions and reporting non-compliance. Drawing on data from 32 in-depth interviews with individuals who have acted as sureties, this paper examines the complex, contradictory, and damaging implications of exploiting personal relationships for the state’s surveillance and monitoring interests. We argue that by placing sureties in such a role, the court stresses the accused’s social relationships by transforming the accused’s support network into an apparatus of state control. Sureties describe exploited relational bonds and ruptured relationships, insisting they will never act as a surety again. We conclude by outlining directions for reform, including changing the nature of surety supervision, decriminalization and developing bail supervision programs.