Editor's note: The last paragraph has been amended to fix names.

Noted constitutional lawyer Nathan Whitling is leaving Edmonton’s Parlee McLaws LLP for Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP’s office in the Alberta capital.

Nathan Whitling

Whitling, who’s probably best known for his role in the defence of Guantanamo Bay detainee Omar Khadr, is joining FMC’s litigation team with a focus on constitutional law. “We are delighted to have a lawyer of Nathan Whitling’s calibre joining the FMC team,” said Dennis Picco, the firm’s managing partner in Edmonton. “His broad experience, deep knowledge, and a nuanced understanding of constitutional law will enhance the leadership of FMC’s constitutional practice.”

Whitling acted on a pro bono basis as Canadian co-counsel for Khadr along with Dennis Edney. Their multiple appearances on Khadr’s behalf resulted in several rulings in his favour, including at the Supreme Court of Canada. Last year, for example, the top court ruled that through Canadian officials’ interrogations of Khadr in 2003-04, “Canada actively participated in a process contrary to Canada’s international human rights obligations and contributed to Mr. Khadr’s ongoing detention so as to deprive him of his right to liberty and security of the person.”

In addition to such high-profile cases, Whitling largely focuses on commercial litigation, representing companies involved in commercial and contractual disputes as well as business torts. He also acts for First Nations in aboriginal and treaty rights matters and works on other human rights cases.

“FMC is one of the leading law firms in Edmonton and has a particular focus on doing pro bono work. . . . That’s always been something I’ve been interested in doing as a sideline,” Whitling tells Legal Feeds.

Whitling notes FMC has an active constitutional law practice in Alberta including partner Thomas Wakeling. In one major recent constitutional law case FMC partner Brian Foster and litigation counsel David Tavender acted for the Alberta government regarding the planned national securities regulator, he says.

Canada

7 arrested in Winnipeg teen's stabbing, Winnipeg Free Press

Woman who ran over officer's foot charged, Calgary Herald

Activist says Que. anti-SLAPP law needs tweaking, The Gazette

United States

Judge rules against Utah over road in national park, The Miami Herald

Women charged over stolen military grave markers, PhillyBurbs

International

Former IMF chief to plead not guilty to sex charges, Reuters

Ex-Egyptian finance minister gets 30 years in jail, Reuters

Small firm practitioners from across Ontario are gathering at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre today for the Law Society of Upper Canada’s sixth annual Solo and Small Firm Conference and Expo 2011.

Law society Treasurer Laurie Pawlitza opened the two-day conference this morning, telling the 650 attendees that she was proud to have small-firm practitioners as the “face of our profession in Ontario.” Despite never having practised in a small firm, she said she got insight into the difficulties her own partners faced as a sole practitioner.

“Our job is to regulate the profession in the public interest and facilitate access to justice,” she said. “If we can help you help the public, then we’re doing our job and you can keep doing yours. You’re the front lines of our profession.”

About 12,000, or more than half of all private practitioners in Ontario, work in firms with five lawyers or fewer, while 86 per cent of all firms in the province contain five lawyers or less, Pawlitza said, noting they are also responsible for almost all legal services in languages other than English.

This year, more than 200 registrants are taking part on through a live webcast.

If you wish you were here but can’t attend, tune into Twitter at #soloTO and you’ll feel as though you are because attendees and speakers are tweeting updates throughout the two-day event.

Canada

B.C. court to hear case accusing De Beers of price-fixing, The Canadian Press

Military judges' 5-year terms unconstitutional, court rules, The Chronicle Herald

Convicted murderer maintains innocence: report, The Vancouver Sun

United States

Ownership contract fake, says Facebook founder, Reuters

Ga.'s immigration law challenged by civil rights groups, Reuters

International

Ex-Mali minister indicted over medical aid misuse, Reuters

Argentine pilots charged in 1976-83 'death flights', Reuters

A blue-ribbon group of commissioners from across the globe is calling for an end to misguided drug laws that have had the ironic affect of boosting narcotics usage while fuelling violent cartels that rake in billions of dollars in illicit profits each year.

Criminalizing pot possession wastes resources, says the report. Photo: iStock

“Fifty years after the initiation of the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and 40 years after president Nixon launched the U.S. government’s global war on drugs, fundamental reforms in national and global drug control policies are urgently needed,” said former Brazilian president Fernando Henrique Cardoso, who acted as chairman of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, in a statement today.

“Let’s start by treating drug addiction as a health issue, reducing drug demand through proven educational initiatives and legally regulating rather than criminalizing cannabis,” he added.

Former Colombian president César Gaviria, whose country has been wracked by drug wars, said flawed policies have caused the lawless violence currently consuming much of Latin America.

“Now is the time to break the taboo on discussion of all drug policy options, including alternatives to drug prohibition,” said Gaviria.

The groundbreaking report could well gain traction with policy makers, considering the pedigree of those who helped author it. Former United Nations secretary general Kofi Annan, former UN high commissioner for human rights Louise Arbour, Virgin Group founder Richard Branson, former U.S. secretary of state George Shultz, and former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker all served as commissioners.

Their recommendations for reform, include the following:

● End the criminalization, marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but who do no harm to others.
● Encourage experimentation by governments with models of legal regulation of drugs (especially marijuana) to undermine the power of organized crime and safeguard the health and security of their citizens.
● Ensure a variety of treatment methods are available — including not just methadone and buprenorphine treatment but also the heroin-assisted treatment programs that have proven successful in many European countries and Canada.
● Apply human rights and harm-reduction principles and policies both to people who use drugs as well as those involved in the lower ends of illegal drug markets such as farmers, couriers, and petty sellers.

“The good news is that new approaches focused on regulation and decriminalization have proven to work in a number of countries,” said Branson during a press conference this morning.

“We need more leaders to start looking at alternatives, and to look at fact-based approaches. We need more humane and we need more effective ways to reduce the harm caused by drugs. One thing we cannot afford to do is to go on pretending that the war on drugs is working.”

Canada

Citizens speak out at G20 public hearing, Toronto Star

Rae urges Harper to consult SCC on Senate reform, The Canadian Press

Bountiful polygamist in court, wants details banned, The Canadian Press

United States

Judge rejects bid to end tobacco racketeering case, Reuters

Traders put up 'smokescreen': prosecutors, Reuters

International

Mumbai attack defendant unlikely to testify: lawyer, Reuters

3 Chechen men convicted in exile's murder, Reuters

The self-regulatory system for lawyers in Canada needs an overhaul, University of Calgary law professor Alice Woolley argues in a paper released today.

There has been some (really not enough) debate in the legal profession in Canada about the future of self regulation. There are critics who call for it to be abandoned entirely and have the courts regulate and discipline lawyers as is done in many U.S. states.

Woolley maintains that independence of the bar is paramount, but does not wholly subscribe to the theory that lawyers must regulate themselves in order to be independent. “Rather, the things that independence should protect — the ability of lawyers to be zealous advocates for clients within the bounds of legality — should be used to assess the adequacies of any regulatory scheme. Does regulation ensure that lawyers fulfill their duty of zealous advocacy? Does regulation ensure that lawyers remain within the bounds of legality? Does regulation ensure access to justice?”

She is not calling for the abandonment of the system where lawyers regulate other lawyers, she argues it can be modified to both help ensure accountability and protect clients’ rights. She looks at the changes that have been made to the systems in England and Wales, saying: “Canadian regulation of lawyers could be improved and made better to ensure that lawyers act as zealous advocates within the bounds of legality.”

The paper, “Rhetoric and realities: What independence of the bar requires of lawyer regulation,” makes a number of proposales including the creation of a legal regulatory review office in each province to oversee law society activities. Lawyers and non-lawyers alike would govern it and “have the power to make recommendations to the provincial law society when it believes the law society has failed to discharge its legislative mandate fairly and properly.”

There is definitely a large chunk of the public that think having lawyers discpline each other actually means lawyers protecting their own rather than meting out real discpline and protecting the public. From that point of view, Woolley’s most important proposal is to separate the dispute resolution function of the provincial law societies into a distinct regulatory entity. This would mean that clients could appeal directly to this body with their client-service complaints.

Finally, the paper calls for a greater commitment from the Supreme Court of Canada to facilitate access to justice. Regulating billing, standardizing lawyer services and restoring legal aid funding would all help in this regard. “If clients cannot access lawyers then the rule of law is impaired,” Woolley writes.

The 39-page paper should defiinitely get the bar talking more about this issue. Canadian Lawyer addressed it in a less formal way in the January 2009 cover story but even just a couple of years ago, while ther was still dissatisfaction with the system, very few practising lawyers were interested in debating the issue. Perhaps now is the time — the rest of the common law world is addressing the matter, so should Canada. The future of lawyer regulation affects each and every practitioner in this country, no matter where, no matter what type of law. And lawyers should care about it.

Addendum: On this same note, today, the Law Society of British Columbia started a campaign inviting the public to apply to sit on disicipline and credentials hearing panels. It arises, in part, from “growing public scrutiny of self-regulatory organization,” said LSBC president Gavin Hume. This and other “proactive measures” are being taken “to maintain confidence in the law society’s regulatory process.”

Canada

N.S. sex assault victim awarded extra $60K, CBC News

B.C. group takes housing battle to top court, Victoria Times Colonist

Charges stayed for 31 accused Que. Hells Angels, The Canadian Press

United States

No prayers at Texas school graduation: judge, Reuters

Judge approves Google Buzz settlement, Reuters

International

Polish court clears soldiers over Afghan civilian deaths, Reuters

Nuclear referendum to proceed: Italian court, Reuters