Abstract
Law reform and source material
Witnesses – Ontario, Canada
Motherisk Commission, Harmful Impacts: The Reliance on Hair Testing in Child Protection, Report, February 2018, available at <http://motheriskcommission.ca/wp-content/uploads/Report-of-the-Motherisk-Commission.pdf>
In 2015, The Honourable Susan E Lang issued a report in which she concluded that hair-strand drug and alcohol testing, conducted by the Motherisk Laboratory at the Hospital for Sick Children (in Toronto, Canada), was systematically ‘inadequate and unreliable’. She recommended a further independent review to determine the extent to which the flawed testing affected child protection decisions. Based on that recommendation, the Ontario government appointed an independent commissioner. Over two years, the Motherisk Commission reviewed 1,271 cases from children’s aid societies across Ontario, finding that flawed testing ‘had a substantial impact on the outcome of 56 of them’. In this report, the Commission reviews the rules governing the admissibility of expert opinion evidence in Canada, and makes a number of recommendations to ensure its reliability.
Jurors – Canada
Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, House of Commons, Improving Support for Jurors in Canada, Report, May 2018, available at <https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/JUST/Reports/RP9871696/justrp20/justrp20-e.pdf>
This report from the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights considers several possible reforms to the jury system, by way of reducing juror stress. In particular, the Committee recommends that jurors be provided with an information package setting out: their roles and responsibilities; the amount of compensation they will be given; the legal concepts and process; how they can manage conflicts that erupt during deliberations; the potential impact on mental health; and available support mechanisms and coping strategies. The report also recommends a relaxation of rules prohibiting jurors from discussing deliberations; suggests that jurors should be provided with additional compensation; and recommends greater provision of psychological support and counselling services for jurors.
Rules of Evidence – New Zealand
The Law Commission, Second Review of the Evidence Act 2006, Issues Paper, March 2018, available at: <http://www.lawcom.govt.nz/our-projects/second-review-evidence-act-2006?id=1523>
This issues paper considers a wide range of matters in the law of evidence, with a view to determining whether there is need for reform. It examines, among other things, the rules governing the admissibility of prior convictions; sexual history evidence; expert opinion evidence; improperly obtained evidence; the right to silence; identification evidence; and privilege. Furthermore, it considers whether the Evidence Regulations 2007 should be revisited.