Une approche de l’étude du droit et du colonialisme : vers une perspective autohistorique amérindienne sur le changement juridique, la colonisation, les sexes et la résistance à la colonisation

This paper outlines the theoretical perspective we have developed to guide the research we are undertaking on law and colonialism in the Canadian west. Although developed specifically as a tool for defining the theoretical boundaries of our own research, this theoretical perspective may be applied more generally by researchers involved in research on the history of law and social control in colonial societies. The theoretical perspective that we propose is grounded in theoretical and empirical work from a number of different fields, including the history and sociology of social control, the study of legal pluralism, and the study of the process of colonization as it has been approached in recent years by feminist scholars and First Nations historians. The purpose of this paper is to show how this new Amerindian autohistorical perspective can be used to help generate research on the interconnected issues of legal change, colonization, gender, and resistance

Juvenile Justice in Queensland and Canada: New Legislation Reflecting New Directions

Due to their similar colonial histories and common law heritage, Australia and Canada provide an ideal comparative context for examining legislation reflecting new directions in the field of juvenile justice. Toward this end, this article compares the revised juvenile justice legislation which came into force in Queensland and Canada in 2003 (Canada, Youth Criminal Justice Act, enacted on 19 February 2002 and proclaimed in force 1 April 2003; Queensland, Juvenile Justice Act, amended 2003). There are a series of questions that could be addressed including: How similar and how sweeping have been the legislative changes introduced in each jurisdiction?; What are likely to be some of the effects of the implementation of these new legislative regimes?; and, how well does the legislation enacted in either jurisdiction address the fundamental difficulties experienced by children who have been caught up in juvenile justice systems? This article addresses mainly the first of these questions, offering a systematic comparison of recent Queensland and Canadian legislative changes. Although, due to the recentness of these changes, there is no data available to assess long-term effects, anecdotal evidence and preliminary research findings from our comparative study are offered to provide a start at answering the second question. We also offer critical yet sympathetic comments on the ability of legislation to address the fundamental difficulties experienced by children caught up in juvenile justice systems. Specifically, we conclude that while more than simple legislative responses are required to address the difficulties faced by youth offenders, and especially overrepresented Indigenous young offenders, the amended Queensland and new Canadian legislation appear to provide some needed reforms that can be used to help address some of these fundamental difficulties

Show me a bad kid and I'll show you a lousy parent: making parents responsible for youth crime in Australian and Canadian context

This article surveys literature bearing on the issue of parental liability and responsibility for the crimes of young offenders, with a particular focus on comparing different approaches to dealing with the issue in Australia and Canada. This comparative analysis of Australian and Canadian legislative and policy approaches is situated within a broader discussion of arguments about the “punitive turn” in youth justice, responsibilisation, and cross-jurisdictional criminal justice policy transfer and convergence. Our findings suggest that there are significant differences in the manner and extent to which Australia and Canada have invoked parental responsibility laws and policies as part of the solution to dealing with youth crime. We conclude by speculating on some of the reasons for these differences and establishing an agenda for additional needed cross-jurisdictional research. In particular, we argue that it would be fruitful to undertake a cross-jurisdictional study that examines the development and effects of parental responsibility laws across a larger number of different Western countries as well as across individual states and provinces within these national jurisdictions