1

LASO 204 W2017

TAKE HOME FINAL EXAM

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

On this paper you will find two sections. Students who did not complete the optional assignment
complete PARTS A and B. Students who have completed the optional assignment complete only
PART B.

As this is a take-home paper it is not expected that you will undertake extensive additional research
– however you may draw from other materials if they relate to the readings in the topic. Since this is
a take-home examination there can be no submission after the deadline. Should extenuating
circumstances arise such as illness or a family emergency you should contact me and alternative
arrangements can be made. The fact that you have a number of other assessments due at the same
time does not constitute grounds for an exception. You are not expected to spend all of the time
from the paper becoming available until its due date working on it.

When you come to write your paper remember a few key points which will influence how your
paper is marked; (a) Read the question once, then again and then a third time and then answer the
question or respond to the prompts in the topic question (b) Don’t fall into the trap of seeing a
keyword, say ‘rule of law’, and then writing everything you can find about the topic (c) avoid the
temptation to indulge in polemic – if the topic asks your opinion it needs to be grounded in
evidence or other academic opinions or discussion. You should show, if it is a controversial issue,
that you are aware of all sides of the debate.

SUBMISSION DETAILS AND WORD LIMIT

Your answers should be submitted on Connect by Monday 11 December at 11.59 pm.

Your answer for each part should be in the range of 1000-1500 words.

Students completing Parts A and B should submit their answers as one document on Connect

You should remember to acknowledge any quotes or material used from sources in a reference. It
does not matter which format you use (APA, Chicago or any other) but you should be consistent
throughout the paper in your usage. If you use references from a website you should reference the
URL and name of site.

You must include a bibliography in the correct format.

1
 2

PART A
STUDENTS WHO DID NOT COMPLETE THE OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT SHOULD CHOOSE ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING TOPICS.

LENGTH: 1000-1500 WORDS

STUDENTS WHO COMPLETED THE OPTIONAL ASSIGNMENT DO NOT COMPLETE THIS PART A

QUESTION ONE

“The right to one’s day in court, the right to be heard, the right to take part in procedures through
which one’s fate is determined all provide the basic substance of the process, which is, in turn, at the
heart of the conceptions of fairness and justice.”

Austin Sarat, “Access to Justice, Citizen Participation and the American Legal Order”

To what extent does a lawyer have an obligation to assist the public to have their day in court as
described by Sarat? Discuss the means by which the principles of fairness and justice are upheld in
our legal system.

QUESTION TWO

Historically the law has been used as an instrument to oppress, exclude and discriminate against
racial, ethnic and religious minorities. This has certainly been the case in Canada, as in other places
around the globe.

Given that all persons and groups are now guaranteed protection under the law (and explicitly in the
Charter) do you think it can be said that the law in Canada can now be correctly described as
“colour-blind”? Are all persons guaranteed equal protection and access to the law, regardless of race
and ethnicity? You should support your response with examples and critical commentary (references
from the readings).

QUESTION THREE

Horrigan observes that “judges are no better adjudicators of life and death questions than ordinary
citizens, at least in terms of the ethical and philosophical questions…” (Adventures in Law and
Justice, 2003: 143). Further it can be argued that a major flaw in the role of the judiciary is that its
membership is not representative of all groups in society’.

Consider the role of judges in our legal system. Do you agree with the comments above? Would it
make a difference if indeed the courts were reflective of all groups in society?

2
 3

PART B
BOTH GROUPS OF STUDENTS SHOULD ANSWER ONLY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS

LENGTH: 1000-1500 WORDS

QUESTION ONE
You are a miner working in a small town of several thousand people in northern BC. The town
relies upon the continuing operation of the mine to survive. The mine has recently been taken
over by a multinational corporation. In their drive to maximize profits the company has
introduced a number of ‘short-cuts’, including the discharge of untreated water full of
hazardous chemicals into the local river. You are aware of the environmental harm as you are
also a keen fisher and you see the dying fish and wildlife. The water has also taken on a yellow
colour. The local Environmental Protection Authority officer conducts a survey of the area and
concludes that it is not harmful and will dissipate. When you query him he admits that the tests
have been doctored but says: “What can I do? A Provincial law has been passed exempting the
company from most of the environmental regulatory standards”, You have also heard from an
environmental activist friend that the water is full of hard metals that are harmful to the health.
You are invited to a community meeting where there is talk of initiating a class-action against
the company and the Provincial government. You know that the law is valid and that the town
replies upon the continued activity of the mine.

Outline how you might respond differently, drawing from the different categories of ‘before the
law’, ‘with the law’ and ‘against the law’ and what this would mean for your own action. You are
relating the possible courses of action that a person following each of these categories would
take. Are there any additional facts that you would need to know to make a decision? If so
identify what they are. What approach would best suit your own legal consciousness? (i.e. think
of how you would respond and what you would do and relate it to the three different
categories)

QUESTION TWO
You have an elderly relative with whom you are very close. They have been diagnosed with a
terminal cancer and are in great pain. They are asking you to provide relief in helping them to have a
death with dignity (euthanasia) as they are not capable of carrying it out themselves. Your relative
has made application to the courts for relief but the decision was adamant in refusing any relief. The
problem is that the law in the Province forbids assisting persons in this situation and makes it a
criminal offence to do so with the penalty of several years in jail for persons convicted. You know
that there is a website through which you can procure prohibited chemicals to assist in euthanasia.

Is this an area that the law should regulate? Should a judge have the power to determine issues
relating to an issue such as euthanasia? Consider each of the possible alternatives of legal
consciousness (Before, With and Against the Law) and how they might have a bearing upon how you
might respond to this situation.

-define euthanasia (focus on BC, Canada)

3
 4

-only a term used for animals now

-before, against, after the law -> how come the terminology shift? When did the shift
happen? Who nominated the shift?

-bring in the notion of morality

-focus on texts (what we’ve already read)

-physician assisted suicide -> medical term to a legal term?

-What does it mean?

-want to hear our voice