Many legal systems throughout the world have established out-of-court remedies to rectify miscarriages of justice and wrongful convictions. In Canada, this extraordinary remedy is served by a government minister, who is entrusted with the assessment of claims of innocence post-conviction. While researchers have already addressed various concerns over the current conviction review process (Braiden & Brockman, 1999; Walker & Campbell, 2009; Roach, 2012a), Roach (2012b) emphasized that little is known about the applicant’s lived experience. This thesis intends to explore the underlying rationale of the current regime under section 696.1 of the Criminal Code and shed light on how the Canadian government, through the Minister of Justice addresses claims and attempts to remedy wrongful conviction. A case study of Mr. Hailemikael Fekade Kassa’s criminal case file, an applicant who consented to this study of his second-degree murder conviction in 2009, will be used to explore the challenges faced by a Canadian claimant of innocence in preparation of his post-conviction review application. This research has revealed that: (1) the Canadian conviction review process implicitly removes the responsibility for error from the conventional justice system; and (2) despite significant evidence capable of raising doubt, the applicant under study encountered great difficulty in meeting the stringent eligibility criteria. A review of the literature provides the necessary contextual information to this critical examination through a comparative study of the post-conviction review schemes operating in North Carolina, the United Kingdom, Norway and Canada. Further, this project uses Foucault’s (1991) theory of governmentality as its analytical framework to investigate the governmental technologies and rationalities securing the current objectives of the Canadian review process and to explore the effects of policy at the micro-level. Following a presentation of the major findings and brief discussions of the evidence discovered in Mr. Kassa’s file, a final analysis situates the research findings within governmentality theory and highlights their broader implications.

in English This diploma thesis deals with the field of commercial law concerning corporate groups. It focuses mainly on the influential person and its position and the emphasis is on the influence exercised and the consequences that the performance may cause. A substantial part of the thesis is devoted to the tools available to a person influenced and creditors in cases where the consequences foreseen by law are caused. The second part of the thesis deals with the same issue, but in terms of the legal order of the Great Britain. There is no regulation of this area of corporate law conceived as comprehensively as it is in the legal framework of the Czech Republic. The diploma thesis therefore focuses on the individual provisions of various legal regulations, which in this context protect the influenced/ subsidiary companies and their creditors. The final part is devoted to the comparison of both legal systems with the emphasis on comparing similar legal provisions as well as issues that are not regulated in the Czech legal framework. By comparison, I conclude that the Czech legislation provides a more suitable environment for the status of an influential person, the functioning of corporate groups, the protection of persons influenced and their creditors.

Magister Scientiae Dentium - MSc(Dent) / Bite mark evidence has been admitted into US courts since the 1870s. It quickly gained popularity after the conviction of W.E. Marx in 1974 for manslaughter using primarily bite mark evidence. However, since the development of DNA typing and testing in forensic science, the emergence of wrongful convictions has placed the validity of bite mark evidence admissibility into severe dispute. This mini-thesis is a condensation of the past ten years’ worth of literature on the latest researches regarding bite mark evidence. The theory of the uniqueness of the human dentition is analysed. The accurate reproducibility of bite mark on skin with regard to distortion is discussed. Some bite mark court cases, including wrongful convictions are explored. Inconsistent expert opinions and the lack of standards amongst practitioners are also examined. The aim of this study is to summarize the validity of bite mark evidence in the courts of law.

The majority of information related to the postprison experiences of exonerated individuals is frequently found in reports by journalists, or based on the findings of scholars on systematic factors that contribute to wrongful incarcerations. There is a lack of social science research on the unexplored meanings and essence of the postprison lived experiences of exonerees exclusively from their perspectives. The purpose of this phenomenological study was to understand and describe the postprison lived experiences of exonerated individuals, 1 year or longer after their prison release. The conceptual framework was guided by Tajfel's social identity theory and Becker's social reaction theory. Interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of 8 exonerated males who were released from prison 1 year or longer. The data were analyzed using van Kaam's 7-step phenomenological analysis process as modified by Moustakas. The 7 themes that emerged from the data were employment and financial challenges, negative societal reaction, broken family relationships, unresolved emotional and psychological factors, self-imposed social isolation, role of family support, and resilience. Understanding the experiences of exonerees contribute to positive social change by providing knowledge to policymakers and others in the criminal justice system to assist in creating policies to expunge the records of exonerees without the necessity of litigation. Findings from this study also provide valuable insights on the need to offer monetary compensation and social services assistance to exonerees in all U.S. states to help in their reintegration experiences as they transition into their communities.

In Canada, wrongful convictions arose as a social problem with the rise of the innocence movement throughout the 1990s (Zalman, 2020). Despite its rise as a social problem and the increasing attention it has received in the popular media, there has been a lack of research analyzing exactly how wrongful convictions are constructed. The purpose of this research is to analyze how the claimsmakers present at the Morin Inquiry constructed the wrongful conviction of Guy Paul Morin. The purpose of this analysis is to provide insight into the overall construction of wrongful convictions as a social problem through the examination of the claimsmaking taking place within a typifying example. To accomplish this, a qualitative content analysis of the Commission on the Proceedings Involving Guy Paul Morin, using a social constructionist lens, was conducted. Specifically, this thesis analyzed the contents of the Morin Inquiry using the theory of contextual constructionism as defined by Best (1987, 2013). The findings of this research reveal that: (1) the claimsmakers in the Morin Inquiry constructed Guy Paul Morin’s wrongful conviction as a preventable occurrence caused by a combination of individual wrongdoings and correctible systemic errors; (2) through the construction of blameless victims and blameworthy villains as well as the demonstration that wrongful convictions challenge the legitimacy of the criminal justice system, the claimsmakers were able to demonstrate that Morin’s wrongful conviction was worth addressing; and (3) through the adoption of inquiry recommendations, future wrongful convictions can be prevented, and the legitimacy of the criminal justice system can be restored. Finally, this thesis concludes by discussing implications, contributions and limitations of the findings before presenting ideas for future research.

This thesis deals with compensation for immaterial damages in the Czech Republic and Germany with focus on personal injuries and a specific question of wrongful birth and wrongful life actions. Its aim is to describe the differences between both legislations. In the first part my work is concerned with a theoretical analysis of the conditions of damage liability in the tort law in both countries. The second chapter follows up with the definition of material and immaterial damages and the way and extent of their compensation. The third one is concentrated directly on personal injuries, it introduces the term and the range of persons entitled to a compensation and it analyses the way and extent of the compensation for personal injuries (above all the damages for pain and suffering) in the Czech Republic and Germany, with specific emphasis on the Methodology of the Czech Supreme Court on the compensation for immaterial damages in case of personal injuries. The fourth chapter is focused on an ethical and legally complicated question of wrongful birth and wrongful life actions.

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit (L.L.M.)" / Une personne est injustement condamnée à l'emprisonnement. Elle est victime d'une erreur judiciaire. Plusieurs causes peuvent être à l'origine d'une telle injustice mais malheureusement il est difficile de le prouver. Le système de justice pénale au pays n'est pas à l'abri des condamnations injustifiées et plusieurs innocentes victimes en ont payé le prix. Or, comment une victime d'erreur judiciaire peut-elle prouver son innocence et ainsi recouvrer la liberté à laquelle elle a droit? Certes, l'aveu du coupable ou la découverte d'une nouvelle preuve peuvent servir de moyens de reconnaissance factuelle d'une condamnation injustifiée. Toutefois, certains obstacles procéduraux comme les délais d'appel, les règles d'admissibilité de la preuve nouvelle ou encore le mécanisme de correction des erreurs judiciaires prévu aux articles 696.1 et suivants du Code criminel peuvent compliquer le scénario. Avant le 4 juin 2002, cette dernière procédure était visée par l'article 690 du Code. Toutefois, suite à de nombreuses critiques ainsi qu'à une consultation publique orchestrée par le gouvernement canadien, des modifications législatives ont été apportées à cette procédure. Mais celles-ci sont-elles suffisantes? Nous pensons que certaines des modifications sont grandement appréciables. Cependant, la structure d'évaluation des dossiers et de recommandation des dossiers au ministre de la Justice mériterait la mise en place d'un comité formé d'avocats indépendants pour conseiller ce dernier. Cela est nécessaire afin de réduire à néant tout conflit d'intérêts potentiel de la part du Ministre et d'assurer la transparence du processus en cause. / A person is unjustly condemned to imprisonment. He or she is victim of a wrongful conviction. Many causes can lead to such an injustice but unfortunately, it is hard to prove. The country's criminal justice system makes no exception to wrongful verdicts of guilt and many innocent people have paid the priee. Thus, how can a person victim of a wrongful conviction prove his innocence and recover his rightful freedom? Of course, the confession of the true guilty person, the discovery of new evidence or a special inquiry commission are all ways of recognizing factually an unjust guilty verdict. However, certain procedural obstacles such as appeal delays, rules of admissibility of new evidence or even the procedure for correcting wrongful convictions provided under article 696.1 and following of the Criminal code, can complicate the scenario. Before June 4, 2002, the latter procedure was provided under article 690 of the Code. However, following great criticism as well as a public consultation orchestrated by the Canadian government, legislative modifications were brought to that procedure. Are the modifications made to the procedure sufficient? We believe that some of them are greatly appreciable. However, the evaluation and case recommendation structure to the Minister deserves the creation of a committee constituted by attorneys fully independent of the Minister able to advise him or her. This is necessary in order to fully reduce any potential conflicts of interest by the Minister and would ensure transparence of the process in question.

Valstybių teisių perėmimo ir pareigos atlyginti tarptautiniu pažeidimu padarytą žalą tema yra aktuali Lietuvai ir kitoms Baltijos valstybėms dėl to, kad pastaruoju metu itin aktyviai Lietuva pradėjo reikalauti Rusijos Federacijos atlyginti tarptautiniais pažeidimais, įvykdytais SSRS, padarytą žalą. Šios žalos Rusijos Federacija atlyginti nesiima, motyvuodama tuo, kad Rusijos Federacija yra skirtingas subjektas nuo SSRS, ir, esą, tokia padėtis ją atleidžia nuo atsakomybės bei iš jos išplaukiančių pareigų. Valstybių pareigos atlyginti tarptautiniu pažeidimu padarytą žalą klausimas valstybių teisių perėmimo kontekste taip pat nėra nei reguliuojamas universalių tarptautinių dokumentų, nei gausiai pagrįstas vieninga tarptautine praktika, nei išsamiai nagrinėtas tarptautinės teisės doktrinoje. Dėl šios priežasties būtina išnagrinėti tiek tarp valstybių susiklosčiusią praktiką, tarptautinius teisinius santykius, kylančius tiek atskirai valstybių teisių perėmimo bei tarptautinio pažeidimo atveju, tiek situacijos, kuriomis šie du institutai sprendžiami drauge. Tad šio tiriamojo darbo tikslas – atskirai išnagrinėti ir aptarti valstybių teisių perėmimo bei atsakomybės už tarptautinius teisės pažeidimus praktiką ir teisinį reguliavimą, kartu doktrinos pateikiamas išvadas; taip pat atskleisti, kokios taisyklės taikomos šiuo metu valstybių atsakomybei už tarptautinės teisės pažeidimus valstybių teisių perėmimo kontekste. Šio tikslo siekiama įgyvendinant konkrečius uždavinius: išnagrinėti... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The subject of state succession and obligation to make reparation for the injury caused by internationally wrongful act is a matter of great relevance to Lithuania and other Baltic states because recently Lithuania began to require from Russian Federation to make reparation for the internationally wrongful acts committed by the USSR very actively. Russian Federation refuses to make reparation motivating that Russian Federation is a separate subject from USSR and that this is the reason why it is not responsible for the wrongful acts committed by the USSR. The question of the obligation to make reparation in the context of state succession is not under regulation of universal treaties, nor multiplicitly founded on judicial practice, also is not a subject of wide analysis in doctrinal level. That is why it is necessary to analyze practice of the states, international relations, arising in the area of state succession and internationally wrongful acts as well as the situations were these two institutes are to be dealt together. Therefore the aim of this master’s work is to analyze and discuss the cases and legal regulation as well as the doctrinal conclusions on state succession and obligation to make reparation; also to reveal the rules which are applied on the state responsibility in the context of state succession. This aim is to be pursued through particular tasks: to analyze the concept, scope, variants of state succession, to describe internationally wrongful act, it’s... [to full text]

Une personne est injustement condamnée à l'emprisonnement. Elle est victime d'une erreur judiciaire. Plusieurs causes peuvent être à l'origine d'une telle injustice mais malheureusement il est difficile de le prouver. Le système de justice pénale au pays n'est pas à l'abri des condamnations injustifiées et plusieurs innocentes victimes en ont payé le prix. Or, comment une victime d'erreur judiciaire peut-elle prouver son innocence et ainsi recouvrer la liberté à laquelle elle a droit? Certes, l'aveu du coupable ou la découverte d'une nouvelle preuve peuvent servir de moyens de reconnaissance factuelle d'une condamnation injustifiée. Toutefois, certains obstacles procéduraux comme les délais d'appel, les règles d'admissibilité de la preuve nouvelle ou encore le mécanisme de correction des erreurs judiciaires prévu aux articles 696.1 et suivants du Code criminel peuvent compliquer le scénario. Avant le 4 juin 2002, cette dernière procédure était visée par l'article 690 du Code. Toutefois, suite à de nombreuses critiques ainsi qu'à une consultation publique orchestrée par le gouvernement canadien, des modifications législatives ont été apportées à cette procédure. Mais celles-ci sont-elles suffisantes? Nous pensons que certaines des modifications sont grandement appréciables. Cependant, la structure d'évaluation des dossiers et de recommandation des dossiers au ministre de la Justice mériterait la mise en place d'un comité formé d'avocats indépendants pour conseiller ce dernier. Cela est nécessaire afin de réduire à néant tout conflit d'intérêts potentiel de la part du Ministre et d'assurer la transparence du processus en cause. / A person is unjustly condemned to imprisonment. He or she is victim of a wrongful conviction. Many causes can lead to such an injustice but unfortunately, it is hard to prove. The country's criminal justice system makes no exception to wrongful verdicts of guilt and many innocent people have paid the priee. Thus, how can a person victim of a wrongful conviction prove his innocence and recover his rightful freedom? Of course, the confession of the true guilty person, the discovery of new evidence or a special inquiry commission are all ways of recognizing factually an unjust guilty verdict. However, certain procedural obstacles such as appeal delays, rules of admissibility of new evidence or even the procedure for correcting wrongful convictions provided under article 696.1 and following of the Criminal code, can complicate the scenario. Before June 4, 2002, the latter procedure was provided under article 690 of the Code. However, following great criticism as well as a public consultation orchestrated by the Canadian government, legislative modifications were brought to that procedure. Are the modifications made to the procedure sufficient? We believe that some of them are greatly appreciable. However, the evaluation and case recommendation structure to the Minister deserves the creation of a committee constituted by attorneys fully independent of the Minister able to advise him or her. This is necessary in order to fully reduce any potential conflicts of interest by the Minister and would ensure transparence of the process in question. / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit (L.L.M.)"

Subjects designated by the neologism 'disability' typically experience various forms of marginality, discrimination and inequality. The response by social scientists and professionals engaged in social policy and service delivery has been to combat the 'disability problem' by way of implementing anti-discrimination protections and various other compensatory initiatives. More recently, with the development of biological and techno-sciences such as 'new genetics', nanotechnologies and cyborgs the solution to 'disability' management has been in the form of utilizing technologies of early detection, eradication or at best, technologies of mitigation. Contemporary discourses of disablement displace and disconnect discussion away from the 'heart of the problem', namely, matters ontological. Disability - based marginality is assumed to emerge from a set of pre-existing conditions (i.e. in the case of biomedicalisation, deficiency inheres in the individual, whilst in the Social Model disablement is created by a capitalist superstructure). The Great Divide takes an alternative approach to studying 'the problem of disability' by proposing that the neologism 'disability' is in fact created by and used to generate notions and epistemologies of 'ableism'. Whilst epistemologies of disablement are well researched, there is a paucity of research related to the workings of ableism. The focal concerns of The Great Divide relate to matters of ordering, disorder and constitutional compartmentalization between the normal and pathological and the ways that discourses about wholeness, health, enhancement and perfection produce notions of impairment. A central argument of this dissertation figures the production of disability as part of the tussle over ordering, emerging from a desire to create order from an assumed disorder; resulting in a flimsy but often unconvincing attempt to shore up so-called optimal ontologies and disperse outlaw ontologies. The Great Divide examines ways 'disability' rubs up against, mingles with and provokes other seemingly unrelated concepts such as wellness, ableness, perfection, competency, causation, productivity and use value. The scaffolding of the dissertation directs the reader to selected sites that produce epistemologies of disability and ableism, namely the writing of 'history' and Judeo-Christian renderings of Disability. It explores the nuances of ableism (including a case study of wrongful life torts in law) and the phenomenon of internalized ableism as experienced by many disabled people. The study of liberalism and the government of government are explored in terms of enumeration, the science of 'counting cripples' and the battles over defining 'disability' in law and social policy. Additionally another axis of ableism is explored through the study of a number of perfecting technologies and the way in which these technologies mediate what it means to be 'human' (normalcy), morphs/simulates 'normalcy' and the leakiness of 'disability'. This analysis charts the invention of forearms transplantation (a la Clint Hallam), the Cochlear implant and transhumanism. The Great Divide concludes with an inversion of the ableist gaze(s) by proposing an ethic of affirmation, a desiring ontology of impairment.