The University of British Columbia
UBC - A Place of Mind
The University of British Columbia Vancouver campus
Asia Pacific Dispute Resolution
  • Home
  • Introduction
    • Who We Are
    • About Allard School of Law
    • About IAR
    • About MCRI
    • Biographies
    • International Advisory Board
  • Program
    • Research Groups
      • Coordinated Compliance Research Group
      • Country Research Groups
        • Canada
        • China
        • India
        • Indonesia
        • Japan
    • Program Outline
  • Partners
    • Institutional Partners
    • Research Network
    • Sponsors
    • Academic Community
  • Database
    • Phase I
      • Archival Research Protocol I
      • Interview Protocol I
    • Phase II
      • Archival Research Protocol II
  • Workshops & Conferences
    • Workshops & APDR Meetings
      • 2018 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2017 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2016 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2015 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2014 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2013 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2012 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2011 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2010 Workshops & Meetings
      • 2009 Workshops & Meetings
    • Conferences
      • 2018 Conferences
      • 2017 Conferences
      • 2016 Conferences
      • 2015 Conferences
      • 2014 Conferences
      • 2013 Conferences
      • 2012 Conferences
      • 2011 Conferences
      • 2010 Conferences
      • 2009 Conferences
  • Dissemination
    • China Links
    • Publications
      • APDR Publications Inventory
      • APDR Working Papers Series
      • APDR Research Notes (RN)
    • Students and Post Doctoral Research Fellows: Dissemination
    • Policy Engagement
  • Archive Phase I
  • Contact Us
» Home » Case comment: R v Gladue

Case comment: R v Gladue

By [posts-author-link] on [date]

ID: HARP-385
Title: Case comment: R v Gladue
Source: Canadian Woman Studies , v.20(3) Fall’00 pg 85-91
Parties:
Dispute Resolution Organ:
Year: 2000
Pages: 0
Author(s):
Keywords: Canada, equality before the law, gender equality, human rights, woman, justice, civil and political rights, violence, indigenous people, crime, Supreme Court, minority rights
Abstract: The judgment does not recognize the unique situation of Jamie Tanis Gladue as an Aboriginal woman. The Supreme Court refused to consider her crime in the context of the domestic violence perpetrated against her; failed to include domestic violence in its analysis of Aboriginal heritage; and refused to send the matter back for a new sentencing hearing because it was a “serious crime of violence.” There is evidence that Ms. Gladue was the victim of spousal abuse and may have been able to argue the defence of self-defence to her original charge of second-degree murder had she gone to trial. Chances are Ms. Gladue would never have gone to jail, had her Aboriginal heritage and spousal abuse been considered. But the judgment applied a narrow and gender neutral interpretation of s. 718.2(e), and thereby missed an opportunity to break ground in fighting systemic discrimination against Aboriginal women in the Canadian justice system.
Secured: False
Download Article: Available here

Read More | [comments]

Asia Pacific Dispute Resolution
Vancouver Campus
1234 Street
Vancouver, BC Canada V0V 0V0
Back to top
The University of British Columbia
  • Emergency Procedures |
  • Terms of Use |
  • Copyright |
  • Accessibility