PETER A. ALLARD SCHOOL OF LAW FACULTY NEWS

By Heidi Wudrick*

Research With Impact

Our faculty members are committed to both curiosity-driven research and work that responds to pressing societal challenges. We aim to impact policy, legislation and the lives of individuals and communities. Here we provide a snapshot of four recent projects and initiatives at the law school that engage with issues across criminal law, social policy and family law.

Indictment: The Criminal Justice System on Trial

A new book by Allard Law Professor Benjamin Perrin provides a rigorous critique of Canada’s criminal justice system, bringing to light stories of survivors and offenders. In Indictment: The Criminal Justice System on Trial (University of Toronto Press), Perrin calls for a trauma-informed, evidencebased approach to criminal justice. He examines Canada’s current treatment of victims of crime, Indigenous people and Black Canadians, people with substance use and mental health disorders, and people experiencing homelessness, poverty and unemployment.

As a professor of law and former lead criminal justice advisor and legal counsel to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Perrin brings a wealth of experience to the topic. Indictment also includes insights from others on the frontlines, including prosecutors and defence lawyers, police chiefs, Indigenous leaders, victim support workers, corrections officers, public health experts, gang outreach workers, prisoner and victims’ rights advocates, criminologists, psychologists and leading trauma experts. Bringing forward the voices of marginalized people, along with their stories of survival and resilience, Perrin argues that a better way is possible. This project is supported by the Law Foundation of British Columbia.

Indictment will be available on October 3, 2023. A behind-the-scenes podcast will also launch September 12 on all major platforms. For more, visit <benjaminperrin.ca>.

Housing Assessment Resource Tools

Based at Allard Law and led by Allard Law Professor Alexandra Flynn, the Housing Assessment Resource Tools (“HART”) project researches databased tools and policy solutions that will help address Canada’s housing crisis. Funded by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (“CMHC”) Housing Supply Challenge, the project recently launched three new tools aimed at supporting policy makers in making evidence-based decisions to improve the quality of housing supply.

HART’s Housing Need Assessment Tool uses census data to measure housing need and affordable shelter costs by income category, household size and priority populations, with the goal of helping governments set effective housing targets to lift Canadians out of chronic housing need and homelessness.

The team’s Land Assessment Tool helps pinpoint where non-profit housing should be built. The tool assesses suitable public land based on proximity to key services and amenities, which allows governments to effectively use land to maximize affordable homes.

The Property Acquisitions Tool aims to prevent the loss of affordable housing through property acquisition by governments, non-profit housing providers and community land trusts. It includes a policy map and database, a report on the acquisitions and best practices, and six how-to guides for every level of government to successfully integrate acquisitions into their housing strategy.

The HART team is also working with governments to support proposals for the $4 billion Housing Accelerator Fund launched by CMHC.

“The Evolution of Life Sentences for Second-Degree Murder: Parole Ineligibility and Time Spent in Prison”

A new article by Allard Law Professors Debra Parkes and Isabel Grant and Professor Jane Sprott, Department of Criminology, Toronto Metropolitan University, explores the meaning of a “life sentence” for second-degree murder in Canada. Published in the Canadian Bar Review in 2022, their article, “The Evolution of Life Sentences for Second-Degree Murder: Parole Ineligibility and Time Spent in Prison”, examines what life sentences actually mean for people convicted of murder in terms of how long they spend incarcerated. Since 1976, Canada’s sentencing regime for murder has imposed mandatory life sentences with periods of parole ineligibility ranging from 10 to 25 years. Roughly a quarter of those under federal super- vision are serving life sentences, mostly as a result of the mandatory life sentence for murder, yet there has been little analysis of what these sentences mean in practice.

In their research, supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the authors examined both the length of parole ineligibility periods and how long people were serving in prison beyond those parole ineligibility periods between 1977 and 2020. They found a statistically significant increase in the length of parole ineligibility imposed by judges, as well as an increase in the length of time beyond parole ineligibility that people are serving in custody. While Indigenous persons received somewhat shorter parole ineligibility periods, they served longer periods incarcerated beyond their parole eligibility date.

The literature demonstrates that people who are ultimately paroled for murder have very low violent recidivism rates. The authors conclude that there is no public safety rationale for the increase in punitiveness that has been seen in recent decades.

Why British Columbia’s Rules on Common Law Marriage Need Reform

Since 2013, under British Columbia’s Family Law Act, couples who lived together in a “marriage-like” relationship for at least two years are obligated to share debts and assets accumulated during the relationship in the event of a breakup. They can also be required to pay spousal support. Couples who live together but wish to exclude themselves from the application of these laws need to create and sign a contract to legally opt out.

Family law expert Professor Erez Aloni explores this issue in his paper “Compulsory Conjugality”, published in 2021 in the Connecticut Law Review His research sheds light on how cohabitating couples navigate British Columbia’s opt-out system. After speaking with 30 unmarried couples about why they choose to live together and to what extent they understood the legal implications, Aloni found that most couples either did not know they were in a common law relationship or had misconceptions about the law. Half of the couples he spoke with said they did not want the law to impose financial obligations, but the few couples in his study who tried to opt out said they could not afford a lawyer or did not understand how to properly enter into an agreement.

Aloni argues that although the law has its benefits, it requires changes to align with evolving social norms. First, he emphasizes that the government needs to do a better job of informing people about the law. Additionally, he suggests implementing measures to facilitate the opt-out process. This could involve providing a template contract or developing an app that assists individuals in determining which obligations should apply to their specific circumstances.