Law Times

Law Times • June 20, 2011 Parties play politics on mega-trials W ho would have thought? Th e Conservat ives and the NDP are agreeing on a new crime law. And they want to ram it through Parliament without debate before the end of the month. Th is strange legal tale began May 31 in Quebec when Supe- rior Court Justice James Brun- ton shocked an entire province by announcing he was dropping all charges against 31 of 155 al- leged Hells Angels members picked up in a massive police raid in April 2009. His reason? Brunton decided that with the magnitude and complexity of potential proce- dural and legal issues, it could take at least a decade just to get to trial, which would be too long. In Canada, we have a law that requires that justice be swift and effi cient. But mega-trials usually involve lots of paperwork, wire- taps, and numerous witnesses, all of which raise complicated legal questions. Good defence lawyers can argue endless motions and thereby bog down mega-trials all the way to the Supreme Court. So Brunton let out 31 ac- cused who were facing lesser charges. People in Quebec went mad. Th e notion of any Hells Angels getting off without trial just be- cause the justice system can't get its act together enraged them. It didn't matter to them how long any biker rotted in jail. Nor did they care that the other 124 peo- ple facing more serious off ences of murder and conspiracy to commit murder will stay in jail. Th eir trial starts next June. In the wake of Brunton's de- cision, angry Quebeckers began fi lling radio shows, web sites, and editorial pages with their opinions. Few issues mobilize a population more than a justice system that breaks down. Only one man outside Que- bec seemed to have noticed. Joe Comartin, a veteran lawyer and NDP MP from Windsor, Ont., suddenly became Quebec's voice in Parliament. Comartin remembered that last November, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson had introduced legislation to speed up mega-tri- als and prevent them from get- ting bogged down on complex legal issues. But the legislation was lost in the bundles of crime laws the government was tossing about and went into the wastebasket following the election call in March. It's time to bring it back, said Comartin, who rose in the House of Commons last week and asked Nicholson to work to pass the legislation before the end of the month. Nicholson couldn't believe his good luck. Finally, an oppo- sition MP was agreeing with the Conservatives on a crime issue. "Th at is the easiest pledge that I will ever make," said a The Hill By Richard Cleroux happy Nicholson. Actually, Comartin had al- ready spoken privately to Nich- olson and also lined up Liberal justice critic Irwin Cotler, one of the fi nest legal minds in the country. "With co-operation, we can get things done," said Comar- tin. Who would have known Nicholson could be so approach- able? Have things changed that much? How long will it be be- fore we see Nicholson in a blue sweater playing with a stray kitten? Th e mega-trial bill would es- sentially allow for the appoint- ment of case management judg- es to improve effi ciency, joint hearings, and binding rulings at retrials on legal issues. It would also allow for an extra three jurors per trial to replace those dropping out. At the same time, special mea- sures would help protect the identities of jurors as well as those of witnesses. Liberal leader Bob Rae an- nounced he was in favour of the proposed law but added that he hoped Parliament could take a few more days beyond the June 23 adjournment date to study the legislation thoroughly. But he's for the law in principle. So everything seemed fi ne. But then something hap- pened that nobody expected. Green party Leader Elizabeth May said she wasn't about to give the unanimous consent required to send the legislation through the Commons without debate or even a committee hearing. "I am not about to give con- sent knowing that a bill is about to be passed which will have sig- nifi cant impact and which hasn't had a single day of hearings," she told a reporter. It appears nobody had bothered to ask her for her agreement. Th e news travelled like a fl ash fi re back to Quebec. Th e provincial justice minis- ter raced to Ottawa to talk to May about the legislation and its importance for cracking down on biker gangs. May says she's not against the legislation. She's only against passing it without ex- amining it fully. She's a lawyer, and that's what lawyers do. Th ey look at what they're agreeing to. Th ey read over documents before saying yes. Th is one isn't in the law books — yet. Richard Cleroux is a freelance re- porter and columnist on Parlia- ment Hill. His e-mail address is richardcleroux@rogers.com. COMMENT droves. Women are leaving law fi rms in droves. But some are staying, and good mentoring mentoring women lawyers W BY JEROME SHORE For Law Times omen are graduating from law schools in droves. Women are joining law fi rms in has played a role in that success. Obviously, there are many pressures that are forcing women from private practice. Is mentoring one of the things that ignites the pas- sion to persevere? I think the answer is yes. One additional reality is that much of the mentoring has, by necessity, had to come from men since there aren't enough senior women lawyers to go around. As a result, the suc- cessful mentoring ideas that follow all come from women lawyers who have had male mentors. Donna Shier of Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP speaks of Hugh Morris, a mentor she had early in her career who inspired her to picture a successful future and plan for it. Th e idea is that when you, as a mentor, focus the conversation on your colleagues, you build trust, soften their resist- ance to being frank, and allow them to articulate the imagery of the future they want. By visualizing this future, the other person can more readily take the steps for getting there. Th is is particularly important for women. Th e more vivid their imagery, the more energy to succeed it provides. Rosalind Cooper, a partner at Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, speaks of how ad- dressing work-life balance issues with positive im- agery was an important component of the men- toring she received. Another good mentoring strategy is to do more than just talk. Jennifer Babe, a partner at Miller Th omson LLP, told me an anecdote about Hart- ley Nathan of Minden Gross LLP. When she was a junior lawyer, she was on a fi le in which Nathan was on the other side. After the fi le was done, Nathan not only complimented her on her work but went the extra step of inviting her to do a con- tinuing legal education workshop. Th at was her fi rst of many such presenta- tions. So going beyond talk to open doors is something male mentors can do to add energy to the excitement that women lawyers have for private practice. Because men sometimes have fewer outside pressures, they can take more time to mentor someone patiently. If they use that time to get deeper into the process, they can be very suc- cessful. "Th e men that mentored me taught by OUTRAGE AT COUNSELLING FOR WOMEN I am writing in response to an article on June 6 entitled "LSUC considers counselling for returnees." Th e gist was that the Law Society of Upper Speaker's Corner Advice for men example," says Alexandria Pike of Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP. "I watched them draft, and we discussed why a particular approach was preferable. It's time-consuming but invaluable." Cooper has three other suggestions that come from her experience with male mentors. First, she suggests that a mentor can help instil self-reliance. Th e idea is to set some objectives for which reliance on others is a small factor and personal eff orts will determine success in the struggle. Second, mentors can help their colleagues get involved and succeed in fi rm-wide activities and administration. Tethering people to the management of the fi rm can be energiz- ing when done well. In these situations, mentors must be helpful as a subject-matter expert helping their colleagues participate more eff ectively. Th ird, Cooper suggests that mentors inspire a view of the law as a special endeavour with a vener- able aura. Having a vision of the law from above the day-to-day trudge is energizing. Of course, mentors need to have this view themselves. So if you're a male lawyer mentoring a female colleague, here are six helpful ideas: • Radiate energy. Possibly the most important mentoring goal you have is to infuse your col- leagues with the energy to overcome the pres- sures on women in law. • Encourage the women you mentor to visualize a successful future for themselves and tell you about it. One way to do this is to have them identify a role model they identify with who gives them the optimism to believe that what they want to do can be and has been done. Th en support that vision of success. • Do more than talk. When possible, use your connections to get your colleague an elevated role such as delivering continuing legal educa- tion or a place in some managerial function. • Get deeper into the process with your colleague. While it's more time-consuming, it's also more worthwhile to drill down and communicate the underlying philosophy, thinking, and learning that supports what you have to say. • Challenge your colleague to build self-reliance. • Be inspirational. Inspire your colleagues to love the law and their work in a way that's ener- gizing. Yes, practising law is hard work, but it comes with a purity of purpose, for the most part. Help them remember that aspect, which is too often buried under their in-basket. Jerome Shore is the managing partner of Th e Coaching Clinic. He can be reached at 416-787-5555, coach@ coachingclinic.com or www.coachingclinic.com. Letter to the Editor Canada is considering off ering career counsel- ling to female lawyers to help them understand the consequences of leaving the practice of law before they make the leap. I am a female with a young child who was born six years into my law career. Before I decided to have my child, I created a plan as to how I was going to manage being a lawyer and a mother. I evalu- ated the likely impact on my work and planned accordingly. Th ese are the same skills I use daily for my clients. I evaluate issues and create litigation plans for them based on a variety of factors. I do this well because I am a good lawyer. I feel outrage at the proposed career counselling for female lawyers. If you cannot fi gure out some- thing that important in your own life, are you truly capable of making recommendations to clients and being paid for them? As with much of the extra pampering the LSUC seems to feel that female lawyers need, I am left with the thought I always have: not everyone needs to be a practising lawyer. If some women leave the profession because they'd rather stay at home with their children, that is OK. We don't need to cajole them into staying in the practice of law. Treat us all the same. We are lawyers, and if some people choose to stop practising, let them. Th ere are many others of both genders waiting to fi ll the ranks. Inga Andriessen Andriessen & Associates Professional Corp. Toronto www.lawtimesnews.com PAGE 7

• Cover
• Diversity Stats
• Enhanced Credit
• Focus On Family Law