The Quid Novi MONTREAL, QC
MCGILL UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF LAW - FACULTÉ DE DROIT DE L’UNIVERSITÉ MCGILL
46 02 24 SEPT 2024
LETTER FROM THE EDITOR
The Anonimity Anomaly: Anonymous Posting at McGill is Coming at a Cost to Our Community Anna McAllister | 4L
During my time at McGill Law, I have seen the use of anonym- My more immediate concern with anonymous posting is the ity in publishing in both the Quid and in the McGill Law increase in innocuous anonymous posting. A quick scroll General Facebook group increase exponentially. through McGill General provides dozens of examples. Students asking for syllabi, recruitment and degree planning There are many valid reasons to prefer to post anonymously. guidance, course recommendations, advice on how to navigate Despite our aspirations that law school ought to be a place PubDocs and so much more make up the majority of McGill where the principle of audi alteram partem (“let the other General’s content, and most of it is published anonymously. side be heard”) is not just inscribed on the walls of our moot court but practiced in our daily interactions, this is not the As someone who has shared my internal monologue with case. Fear of retribution or social isolation for voicing an Quid readers for 3.5 years now, I have lost most of my opinion different from those of administrators, professors, or sense of shame when it comes to asking questions of my fellow students stains discussion. While this sense of unease colleagues. While potentially embarrassing at times, I feel has been identified by politically conservative students on that it is through this vulnerability that our community can university campuses for some time, the ongoing conflict in relate to one another and build a strong foundation. I have the Middle East has highlighted that those on all sides of the previously written about the power a fellow student admitting political spectrum have reason to be hesitant when attaching their shortcomings can have to someone who is engrossed their name to a publicly shared opinion. Moreover, depend- by imposter syndrome. A simple, “yeah, I didn’t get to that ing on one’s employment, it may be impossible to publicly reading last night either,” or a “this is so confusing” can go share opinions and anonymity can provide an opportunity a long way. It can be the difference between feeling alone, to nevertheless contribute to Faculty conversations. and feeling in this together. Still, I understand that sharing this vulnerability on a large scale can be intimidating. While I wish our Faculty was a place where people could freely express unpopular views, I understand that is not the I am, however, seriously concerned about the type of commucase and acknowledge the place for anonymous posting. nity we are building if something as simple as asking for an Perhaps considering what steps we can take to make this a upper year’s advice of selecting between two courses has reality warrants further reflection (a column idea for those turned into something that feels too humiliating to put one’s looking for a way to contribute to the Quid!). name to. Moreover, not only is the poster too ashamed to
CETTE SEMAINE... INSIGHTS
COMMUNAUTÉ
4 | TERRORISM AT MCGILL? YOU BE THE JUDGE 2 | BEFORE THE SAO 8 | AKON V. SENEGAL The Tale of Two Cities
3 | LAWST IN THE QUAGMIRE: WHAT ABOUT US?! \ Some of the Faculty’s Most Vulnerable Students Demand Action and Accountability
6 | RECLAIMING OUR NARRATIVE
Vol 46 ● No 02 ask their question, but it signals to others that if they have a similar question, they too ought to ensure no one ever finds out. To me, this feeds into the toxic law school mythology that students must maintain the composure of perfect portrait poses in order to succeed at the Faculty and, eventually, in the legal market. I fear that this anonymity anomaly is a symptom of an illness of disconnection, undue competitiveness, and cruel community gossip culture. Further, this anonymity stifles the possibility for natural mentorship relationships to blossom. Upper-year student and recent-graduate guidance is essential to succeeding in law school. The best way to get this advice is to build a genuine relationship with a deep understanding of one’s goals and aspirations. It is not uncommon for upper-year students
BEFORE THE SAO Anonymous | 2L
From having appointments rescheduled to email “black out periods” that barely change their approach to responding to emails to the utter chaos of advocacy tutorial group registration, many of us are frustrated, perhaps even despaired. In all seriousness, we understand that the SAO is trying their best and we appreciate it immensely. That being said, many of us have been consistently hung to dry.
QUID NOVI •24 SEPT 2024
For fellow Kafka nerds and frustrated students, enjoy this parody of the famous parable in The Trial. Before the [students affairs office] stands a [SAO staff member]. A [student] from [McGill Law] comes to this doorkeeper, and asks for admission to [an appointment/drop in hours] But the doorkeeper says that he cannot grant him admission now. The [student] reflects, and then asks if he will therefore be permitted to enter later. “It is possible,” the doorkeeper says, “but not now.” Since the gate to the [SAO] is open as always and the doorkeeper steps aside, the man bends down to look through the gate into the interior. When the doorkeeper notices this, he laughs and says: “If you find it so tempting, then try to enter despite my prohibition. But take note: I am powerful. And I am only the lowest doorkeeper. From room to room, however, stand doorkeepers, each one more powerful than the last. The mere sight of the third is more than even I can bear.” The [student] from the [faculty of law] had not expected such difficulties; the [SAO] is after all meant to be accessible to everybody at [reasonable times i.e normal business hours], [the student] thinks, but now as he looks more closely at the doorkeeper in his fur coat, his large pointed nose and his long thin black Tatar beard, he [begrudgingly] decides that he would actually prefer to wait until he receives permission to enter. The doorkeeper gives him a stool and lets him sit to the side of the door. [The student] sits there for days and for years. He makes many attempts to gain admission, and tires the doorkeeper with his pleading [and emails]. The doorkeeper 2
to see a question in McGill General and directly contact the person to offer further explanation or support. When the poster is anonymous, this opportunity is extinguished. So where does this leave us, McGill Law? Well, I think we all need to take a moment of self-reflection and consider what we can do to build a community that is more welcoming and does not instill feelings of discomfiture when someone has a question. As upper-years, it is our responsibility to foster this environment. For first-years, I invite you to take the plunge into the uncharted waters of admitting that despite being at Canada’s best law school, you too do not know all the answers. Yours sincerely and vulnerably, Anna McAllister often subjects him to a little questioning, asks him about his [problem] and much else besides, but these are indifferent questions like those posed by great gentlemen, and in the end he always tells him that he cannot admit him yet. The [student], who equipped himself with many items for his journey [angry emails, pending graduation, job applications, pressure from Professors, etc], uses everything, no matter how valuable it is, to [beg] the doorkeeper. The latter does indeed accept everything, but also adds: “I am accepting it only so you don’t think that you neglected something.” Throughout those many years the [student] observes the doorkeeper almost continuously. He forgets the other doorkeepers and this first one seems to him to be the only obstacle to his being admitted to the [SAO]. He curses this unlucky coincidence recklessly and loudly in the early years [i.e 1L], and later as he grows old, simply mutters to [McGill Law General/McGill Law Memes on Facebook]. He becomes childish, and since he has during his long years studying the doorkeeper spotted the fleas in his fur collar, he asks even the fleas to help him change the doorkeeper’s mind. Finally, his eyesight weakens and he does not know whether it is really getting darker around him or whether his eyes are merely deceiving him. Yet he now perceives amidst the darkness a radiance which bursts out inextinguishably from the door of the [SAO]. He does not [wait] much longer. Before he [loses hope], all the experiences of the whole time come together in his mind as a question that he has not yet asked the doorkeeper. He beckons to him, for he can no longer straighten his stiffening body. The doorkeeper has to bend down low to him, for the difference in height has greatly changed to the disadvantage of the man. “So now what else do you want to know?” the doorkeeper asks. “You are insatiable.” “But everyone strives towards the [SAO],” the [student] said, “how is it that during those many years no one except for me requested admission?” The doorkeeper realizes that the [student] is nearing his end, and in order to reach his diminished hearing he roars at him: “Nobody else could be admitted here since this entrance was intended for you alone. I shall go now and close it.”1 To read the original parable, see https://www.hup.harvard.edu/features/ franz-kafka-before-the-law 1
LAWST IN THE QUAGMIRE: WHAT ABOUT Some of the Faculty’s Most Vulnerable Students Demand Action and Accountability Anonymous
We are a group of 30 McGill law students who depend on student loans and bursaries and now find ourselves facing significant repercussions due to the ongoing labour dispute at McGill Law. Our Concerns This situation is more than an academic disruption—it is an impending financial crisis. The most economically vulnerable students will bear the brunt of this dispute should AMPL courses be lost. Our funding, which for many of us not only pays our tuition, but also covers our living expenses, depends on our full-time status. Being forced to repay thousands of dollars in bursaries would create an untenable situation for those of us already in financial need. Additionally, some provincial financial aid programs, notably Quebec’s, limit the number of months students can receive financial aid for each level of education. Unfortunately, even if students repay their loans and bursaries, their 'eligible months' used for the Fall 2024 semester might not be restored. Many students have already used a portion of these months during their previous undergraduate studies. We have concerns that this may leave them with insufficient eligibility to cover the duration of the law program. We need McGill to acknowledge the severity of our situ-
ation and commit to assisting us moving forward. It is unjust for students to bear financial consequences, especially those in financial need, for circumstances beyond our control. The possibility that our education will now cost thousands of dollars more is unacceptable, and in some cases untenable. So far, the administration has ignored legitimate concerns brought to its attention and not offered any serious solutions. This is surprising given McGill’s commitment to equity as a core principle of its academic mission. The students we speak for are affected disproportionately due to their inability to pay for tuition and cost-of-living expenses upfront without government financial support.
ing to waive tuition and fees for any future semester not covered because of the loss of our “eligibility semester.”
McGill should also consider establishing an emergency fund for those hit hardest by the strike.
Additionally, the administration needs to immediately outline potential outcomes and contingency plans if AMPL courses are shortened, or even cancelled.
It goes without saying that our group stands in solidarity with AMPL, and we support the certification process of the union wholeheartedly. The university's wanton disregard of the strike's inequitable impact on students is revealing; it seems more concerned with preventing unionisation than upholding its own principles. Not only do we know how to read, but we can also read between the lines. We demand the respect we deserve as future jurists— more than vague assurances, we need concrete action.
The faculty needs to invite representatives from McGill’s Financial Aid Office, and representatives from Provincial Aid Offices to hold a session where students can ask questions specific to their situation. It is crucial that this session features someone who understands our unique financial realities.
What the Administration Could Do While ending the strike by recognizing AMPL’s right to exist and withdrawing the judicial review would make all of our concerns moot, in the meantime, there are other steps McGill could take to make things easier for its students—to indicate that we are not forgotten. McGill needs to commit to shouldering the financial burden we have been given. This likely means agreeing to pay back any debts we may owe the various government aid agencies due to the ongoing dispute and agree3
Vol 46 ● No 02
TERRORISM AT MCGILL? YOU BE THE JUDGE Anonymous
On January 6, 2021, protesters stormed the US capitol seeking to overturn the election. Many would decry these insurrections as domestic terrorists. More concerning, however, was the pattern the Capitol rioters set. Stormings of official buildings around the world became more common, including in Bangladesh,1 Brazil,2 Kenya,3 and Sri Lanka.4 On Thursday, June 6, 2024, a similar incident befell McGill. Encampment-aligned protesters “forced their way into the James Administration Building, barricaded and chained exterior exits, spray-painted the premises, damaged furniture, and led many employees in the building to feel intimidated, unsafe, and afraid.”5
First, I will provide the sections of the Criminal Code that may be relevant. After, I will reproduce them and describe the debate between those8 who may believe that the storming of the James building may be an act of terrorism and those who disagree. According to S. 83.01 (1)(b), what is in question is whether the storming of the James building: (i) [wa]s committed (A) “in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause, and
LS4PM has suggested that this is not terrorism and labeled such accusations as “absurd.”6 Now, reasonable people may disagree about whether this act is can be categorized as terrorism. But, unfortunately, LS4PM cited only a less-relevant portion of the Criminal Code which may be misleading as it makes the scope of terrorism related crimes seem smaller than it actually is.7 To get an honest sense of whether the actions constituted terrorism, one must look to the sections of the Criminal Code that are likely to be the most relevant.
(B) “in whole or in part with the intention of intimidating the public, or a segment of the public, with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a… domestic… organization to do or to refrain from doing any act” (ii) that intentionally… (C) cause[d] a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or any segment of the public, [or]
Isaac Yee and Tanbirul Miraj Ripon, “Bangladesh prime minister flees to India as anti-government protesters storm her residence,” CNN, (6 August 2024) online: < https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/05/ asia/bangladesh-prime-minister-residence-stormed-intl/index.html >. 1
Doha Madani, “Bolsonaro supporters storm Brazil’s capital as ex-president is believed to be in Florida,” NBC News, (9 January 2023) online: < https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/protesters-storm-brazils-congress-support-former-brazilian-president-j-rcna64816 >.
(D) cause[d] substantial property damage, whether to public or private property, if causing such damage is likely to result in the conduct or harm referred to in [clause] (C),9
2
Aaron Ross, George Obulutsa, and Giulia Paravicini, “Police fire on demonstrators trying to storm Kenya parliament, several dead,” Reuters, (25 June 2024) online: < https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/young-kenyan-tax-protesters-plan-nationwide-demonstrations-2024-06-25/ >. 4 Alys Davies & Simon Fraser, “Sri Lanka: Protesters storm President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s residence,” BBC, (9 July 2022) online: < https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-62104268 >.
QUID NOVI •24 SEPT 2024
3
Letter to McGill Students by Deep Saini (11 June 2024), Encampment and updated proposal, online:<mcgill.ca/president/article/communications-messages-community/occupation-james-administration-building> 6 Law Students for Palestine at McGill, “On the Normalization of Anti-Palestinian Racism at McGill Law,” Quid Novi (10 Sep 2024), at p. 8. 5
They cite s. 83.01(b) of the Criminal Code inaccurately, as they only cite part ii. A and not the accompanying ii. C and ii. D which are arguably far more relevant in this case. See: Law Students for Palestine at McGill, “On the Normalization of Anti-Palestinian Racism at McGill Law,” Quid Novi (10 Sep 2024), at p. 8. 7
4
Proponents may argue that those who stormed the James building clearly did the act with an ideological purpose, namely in support of the political demands of the encampment. Additionally, they would argue that this was intentionally done to intimidate McGill into acquiescing to their demands. Further, they would contend that the storming of the building caused a serious risk to the public – especially to Jewish and Israeli students – and caused substantial damage to McGill’s property. While LS4PM disagrees, they did not sincerely address or rebut the arguments, instead painting the allegations as “absurd.”10 Opponents arguing in good This article does not take a position on whether the JLSA is seeking to make this specific argument. More clarification as to what the JLSA meant in their joint statement which LS4PM criticized is needed from the JLSA executive. As such, I will refer to those who believe the storming of the James building was an act of terrorism simply with words indicating their position in favour of that proposition (i.e. proponents). 8
9
Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46, s. 83.01(b. ii. C-D). Supra 2, p. 9.
10
faith may argue that, while reprehensible, the storming of the James building did not pose a sufficient risk to public safety or the safety of Jewish/Israeli students which could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Further, they may point to the fact that United States prosecutors have been generally reluctant to bring terrorism charges against those involved in the Jan. 6 riots.11
those who stormed the James building constitute a protected Charter group. Further, JLSA’s statement is not a government program or law that “reinforce[s], perpetuate[s], or exacerbate[s] disadvantage.”15 But let me provide a counterproposal, a few questions for readers to consider: 1. Consider the fact pattern of the storming of a government building, whether in the US or internationally. Could this constitute terrorism?
LS4PM’s statement is troubling in terms of the values that future lawyers should seek to achieve, even ones they cite in their own statement. “Notably, integrity is considered a fundamental quality for anyone choosing to practice law.12” Part of integrity is assuming that the other side is acting in good faith. Lawyers are meant to attack arguments, not people. Yet, the statement does not substantially address the allegations made in good faith and rather reads as an attack on the LS4PM’s opponents.
2. Apply your conclusions from Q.1 to the facts of the recent storming of the James administration building. Does the storming of the James building constitute an act of terrorism under the Criminal Code? Why or why not? 3. Considering your answer to Q.2, what would be the appropriate consequence for those who stormed the James Administration building? If you answered yes to question 2, assume you are sentencing them for terrorism-related offences. If you answered no, assume you are sentencing them for other violations. Alternatively, you may decide not to sentence them at all if you believe that punishment is not warranted.
And to Anonymous’ “fact pattern contest,”13 related to this issue the simple answer is as follows: neither people who set up encampments in violation of trespassing laws,14 nor Josh Gerstein, “Why DOJ is Avoiding Domestic Terrorism Sentences for Jan. 6 Defendants,” Politico, (1 March 2022) online: < https://www.politico. com/news/2022/01/04/doj-domestic-terrorism-sentences-jan-6-526407 >. 12 Supra 2, at p. 6 13 See: Anonymous, “Your First Ever Fact Patter,” Quid Novi (10 Sep 2024), 11. 14 See: University of Toronto (Governing Council) v. Doe et al., 2024 ONSC 3755 11
15
R. v. Sharma, 2022 SCC 39, at para. 31.
5
Vol 46 ● No 02
RECLAIMING OUR NARRATIVE The Jewish Law Students Association (JLSA)
In its most recent edition of the Quid Novi, Law Students for Palestine McGill (LS4PM), an anonymous group unwilling to stand by its own statements, published “On the Normalization of Anti-Palestinian Racism at McGill Law,”1 an article that falsely characterized the JLSA as a group that promotes hate and discrimination. Our executives and members will publicly and openly stand behind our words. The JLSA rejects the discriminatory accusations leveled against us and our community. In this article, we will reclaim our narrative and tell our story. This article was collaboratively written by several JLSA executives and members, representing diverse Jewish heritages such as Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi, along with various observance practices and political beliefs.
QUID NOVI •24 SEPT 2024
1. The JLSA strives to represent the Jewish McGill Law community. As the Jewish Law Students Association, our mandate is to represent Jewish students within McGill’s Faculty of Law in all their diversity. Our membership and executive team include individuals with diverse political beliefs, socioeconomic backgrounds, and Jewish practices, representing diasporic groups such as Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, and others. Our members have various relationships with the land of Israel, from those who have lived there for many years to those who see it from afar as a homeland for their community. We recognize this and strive to represent all these voices. Our mandate and stance on Israel is that we support its existence and recognize it as the indigenous homeland of the Jewish people. This is the view of the majority of the Canadian JewLaw Students 4 Palestine McGill, “On the Normalization of Anti-Palestinian Racism at McGill Law,” Quid Novi 46, no.1 (2024): 5. 1
6
ish community, for which 91% hold this belief.2 Having said that, we do not take stances on the policies or actions of the Israeli government. The JLSA welcomes, and encourages, all students to participate in our events regardless of political beliefs. This year, we amended our constitution to include in our mandate to “Foster a safe space for students to learn about and discuss Zionism, the State of Israel, and the Israel-Palestine conflict.”3 We remain committed to making the JLSA a forum for respectful and peaceful discussions regarding the conflict and the feelings students may experience on campus, all while fostering a safe space for Jewish students to be proudly and unabashedly Jewish. However, as would be expected of any affinity group, we will not tolerate expressions of hate against our community or denials of Israel’s right to exist within our spaces. In line with this commitment, we have incorporated the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism into our constitution. This definition is widely recognized by the Jewish community and endorsed by numerous countries, including Canada, as the authoritative standard for identifying antisemitism. This definition includes modern manifestations of antisemitism—such as “holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the state of Israel” and “accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to
the interests of their own nations.”4 Note that this definition does not denote criticism of the Israeli government as antisemitic. It is in upholding this standard of antisemitism that we forcefully condemn the encampment. 2. The encampment was not peaceful and “non-violent.”
Image 1: “Globalize the Intifada”
Image 2: Benjamin Netanyahu effigy
“Jews and Israel 2024 Survey: Ten Further Insights | Canadian Jewish Studies / Études juives canadiennes,” n.d. https://cjs.journals.yorku.ca/ index.php/cjs/jewsandisrael2024#_ftnref8. 2
McGill Jewish Law Students Association / Association des Étudiant.e.s Juifs en Droit de McGill. “Constitution of the McGill Jewish Law Students Association / Association des Étudiant.e.s Juifs en Droit de McGill,” 2024. 3
Image 3: “Zionists are not Welcome” Sign “What Is Antisemitism?,” IHRA, August 20, 2024, https://holocaustremembrance.com/ resources/working-definition-antisemitism. 4
building, intimidating university staff members and requiring police involvement;6 ● hanging an effigy of Benjamin Netanyahu from Roddick Gates (see image 2); ● displaying a sign on the gates of the encampment which read “Zionists are Not Welcome” (see image 3); ● spray painting and wearing symbology that is explicitly supportive of Hamas and the Iranian terror regime worldwide, and ● advertising a “Summer Youth Program” featuring children in keffiyehs brandishing guns (see image 4).
Image 4: Summer Youth Program
Since the encampment was established, different groups have attempted to frame it as a safe and peaceful space where McGill students could voice their grievances. However, the reality is that the encampment was anything but peaceful. We ask you to take a closer look at the events that transpired at the encampment and their consequences to our community. Chants heard at the encampment included “Viva viva Intifada,” (see image 1) “Go back to Poland,” “Yemen, Yemen make us proud; turn another ship around,” and “There is only one solution: Intifada, revolution,” and more. While passersby may not realize, these are virulently antisemitic tropes. Other hateful and violent actions committed by individuals from the encampment include: ● Engaging in violent and vandalous riots and forcing students off campus;5 ● forcing entry into and attempting to occupy the Le James Angela Campbell to Dymetri Taylor, President, Students’ Society of McGill University, “Notice of Default” (Montreal, Quebec: McGill University, July 10, 2024). 5
These slogans and actions are not about feelings; they are purposefully designed to intimidate and alienate Jewish students on campus and have had this effect on many. During the encampment, a Jewish student with PTSD messaged members of the Jewish McGill community asking if someone would accompany her to her summer class because she was scared to walk alone. She was not the only Jewish student who no longer felt safe on campus because of the encampment. Let us be clear: the right to peaceful protest is a fundamental tenet of democracy, and criticizing the policies and actions of the Israeli government is not inherently antisemitic. Nevertheless, individuals in the encampment’s actions overstepped the boundaries of peaceful protest and instead engaged in blatant antisemitism. The encampment and the violence committed by its members forced the McGill administration’s hand and resulted in SPHR, an organizer of the encampment, losing its club status at the university. Angela Campbell to Dymetri Taylor, President, Students’ Society of McGill University, “Notice of Default” (Montreal, Quebec: McGill University, July 10, 2024). 6
LS4PM‘s endorsement of this behavior demonstrates a lack of regard for the rule of law and McGill’s student code of conduct7. When we see an endorsement of this kind of violent action, we have no choice but to denounce it and ensure our students’ safety, security, and success on campus and we will continue to do so. 3. The JLSA rejects the accusation that we are “discriminatory,” “racist,” “white supremacist,” and/or “colonialist.” We reject the accusations that we have engaged in discriminatory tropes. The LS4PM article states that the JLSA deployed “anti-poor, colonial, oppressive language …against those within our society who exist most at the margins.” In the following sections, we refute these claims. Nowhere in the JLSA’s statement were these views endorsed nor implied. From the very beginning, our concern has solely been the unsafe and threatening environment for Jewish students. LS4PM’s use of these epithets to denounce the JLSA is a disingenuous attempt to rewrite the realities and purposes of the encampment. In their article, LS4PM acknowledges that they could not demonstrate any discriminatory content in JLSA’s statement. They defend this lack of explanation by claiming that marginalized groups are not obligated to justify themselves. As members of a community that is both historically and currently marginalized, we are all too familiar with the expectation to explain and defend ourselves. We understand the emotional toll this places on individuals and the community alike. Nevertheless, we have repeatedly found ourselves in the position of having to justify our actions. The McGill Student Code of Conduct Section 1. B. 7. states that “No student shall knowingly enter or remain in any University premises (a) Without right or authorization; or (b) With intent to obstruct University activities; or (c) With intent to damage, destroy or steal University property.” 7
7
Vol 46 ● No 02 As future lawyers, we recognize the importance of defending and substantiating our claims when challenged. We simply ask that LS4PM not apply a double standard and hold other marginalized groups to the same level of accountability they expect from us. 4. The JLSA has attempted to build intercommunal bridges. Rather than discriminating against these groups, as LS4PM has claimed, the JLSA has continuously attempted to build bridges and create dialogue. It is antithetical to the values of the JLSA to be Islamophobic, anti-Arab or anti-Palestinian. Standing up against these forms of hate is not only compatible with our values but foundational to them. Our actions demonstrated that LS4PM’s accusations cannot be further from the truth. Through our efforts to build bridges with members of the Palestinian, Muslim, and Arab communities, we aim to form meaningful ties rather than fuel the fires that seek to divide our communities. Since October 7th, we have attempted to promote dialogue—efforts that have been rebuffed—in the following ways:
QUID NOVI •24 SEPT 2024
● On October 20th, less than two weeks after the massacre committed against Israel, our current president reached out to one of the Muslim Law Student Association presidents to attempt to “discuss how to best keep student members of both our clubs feeling safe and secure on campus.” We proposed a oneon-one mediated discussion to ensure that neither side feels insecure. The MLSA ultimately refused. ● In the same dialogue, we proposed releasing a joint statement similar to the one posted by JLSA and MLSA of uOttawa. In the Octo-
8
ber 31st issue, the editorial team at the Quid in the 3rd edition of the 45th volume, endorsed this statement on these pages. Among other things, it said: ○ “We recognize that Jewish and Muslim lives are equally valuable and important and that every loss of life is tragic and represents a story and a family, and a whole circle of people who are grieving.” The JLSA is willing to put out this exact statement at any time in conjunction with MLSA. ● Dean Leckey made several efforts, beginning in November 2023, to facilitate a meeting between us and LS4PM. We were willing to participate in this mediated discussion. However, on February 12, 2024, LS4PM sent Dean Leckey a message rejecting the possibility of participating in a mediated discussion through a professor of both sides’ choice. ● On April 8th, two of the three current members of the JLSA executive team met with the incoming LSA president. They reiterated their desire to reduce tensions on campus and, if possible, meet with other student groups. We maintain our desire to promote dialogue and reduce the tensions on campus. At the same time, we will not compromise our values and principles in the face of bullying and intimidation. It does not matter whether it stems from members of the encampment, SPHR, LS4PM, the LSA, SSMU, or even the McGill administration. We will stand up to anyone who attempts to exclude, marginalize, and deny our right to exist as Jewish students on campus.
AKON V. SENEGAL The Tale of Two Cities Ali Hachem | Alum
In 2020, the state of Senegal agreed to grant to the Senegalese born singer Akon 136 acres of land on its Atlantic Coast in 2020 to build his Akon City — envisioned as a real-life Wakanda. 1 Four years later, the site remain grassland, the first phase of construction having been supposed to be completed by the end of 2023.2 The only building which has been erected is the “Welcome Center,” but the project has since stalled. Senegal’s state-owned tourism and coastal development entity Sapco-Senegal has issued an ultimatum threatening to remove 90% of the land allocated for the construction.3 Furthermore, the value of Akoin, the cryptocurrency introduced by the singer in 2020 for use in Akon City, has dropped from $0.15 to $0.003.4 Numerous articles and opinion pieces have discussed the financial and business reasons for the failure of Akon City. In this piece, I aim to explore two potential explanations. The first Katarina Höije and Fred Ojambo, “Singer Akon’s Multibillion-Dollar Futuristic City in Africa Gets Final Notice” (2024) BNN Bloomberg <https:// www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/company-news/2024/08/02/singer-akons-multibillion-dollar-futuristic-city-in-africa-gets-final-notice/> 2 Aina J Khan, “Akon City: tumbleweed rolls through site of rapper’s Wakanda-inspired dream” (2023) The Guardian < https://www. theguardian.com/music/2023/dec/04/akoncity-tumbleweed-rolls-through-site-of-rappers-wakanda-inspired-dream> 1
Deborah Dan-Awoh, “Singer Akon’s $6 Billion futuristic African City project gets final warning deadline” (2024) Nairametrics < https://nairametrics.com/2024/08/03/singer-akons-6-billion-futuristic-african-city-project-gets-final-warning-deadline/> 3
4
Ibid.
is the challenge of doing business in partnership with a state in Africa. The second, which is more psychological, examines the potential tensions between Senegalese living in Senegal and those who grew up or immigrated to Europe and the US. The State is Not Your Friend: 62.5% of the lowest quartile in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index is comprised of African countries, reflecting the continent's frequently shifting and challenging regulatory environment.5 Starting a business, enforcing contracts, registering property, obtaining regulatory permits, and protecting investors can be particularly difficult across the continent. The constantly shifting landscape and frequently changing policies make it challenging for businesses to establish consistent long-term plans, which in turn raises the cost of doing business in Africa. Furthermore, Africa's access to electricity lags significantly behind the global average, with considerable regional and country-level disparities across the continent. Currently, only 43 percent of Africa's population has access to electricity, which is just half of the global average of 87 percent.6 This is particularly true in the case of Akon City, located near the town of Mbodiène, 120 km south of the capital city of Dakar. Access to the site is challenging due to the lack of roads and electricity, which should be provided by the state or through public-private partnerships (PPP). Although according to the Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) for 2023, Senegal received a score of 43 out of 100, placing it 93rd out of 180 countries. This score is above the ETK, “Identifying the Key Challenges of Doing Business in Africa” (2021) ETK <https:// www.etkgroup.co.uk/identifying-the-key-challenges-of-doing-business-in-africa/> 5
6
Ibid.
regional average of 33. 7 Senegal's highest CPI score was 45 in 2016, which it held until 2020, but it has since declined to 43 starting in 2021. Administrative corruption is a real problem in the country which significantly impact businesses. According to Resimić, 57% of respondents in Senegal reported that they had to pay bribes to obtain a government document. This constituted the second highest result in the survey, far above the average of 31% for the 39 surveyed countries. 8 Additionally, the survey revealed that in Senegal, the administrative processes most susceptible to corruption were obtaining a water connection and securing a construction permit. 9 These factors may explain the slow start of the construction of Akon City. Tensions Between the Senegalese Diaspora and Those in Senegal: When looking at the relationship between the diaspora and those in Senegal, it is often through the lens of illegal immigration to Europe or to lament the brain drain of educated Senegalese leaving the country to seek better wages and education in Europe or in America. However, we rarely hear about those who returned to start a business but faced disappointment due to the way they were treated by the state or their own family and friends, who saw them as outsiders trying to impose foreign ideas on them. Those attempting to launch new business ventures often encounter remarks like “We’re not in Europe here,” “Stop acting like a toubab 10,” or “You don’t understand how things Miloš Resimić, “Senegal: Overview of corruption and anti-corruption” (2024) U4 HELDESK ANSWER 2024: 15 < https:// www.u4.no/publications/senegal-overview-of-corruption-and-anti-corruption.pdf> 7
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid. White person.
10
work around here.” While it's true that business practices differ between Africa and Europe, such comments— often fueled by jealousy—can drive these highly educated and motivated individuals to leave the country to avoid potential conflicts with family, friends, or prospective business partners who remain at home. Akon City is far from a small business endeavor; it is a $6 billion mega-project with contracts and likely international arbitration clauses to address any legal disputes between parties. However, the impact of such tensions on investors' mindset should not be underestimated. I can't say for certain what is going through Akon's mind but perhaps he also felt let down by the "Stop acting like a toubab" attitude, especially when he expected to be embraced by his Senegalese brothers. This could explain why the project hasn't been progressing. Why would someone want to help those who seem ungrateful? Conclusion: Akon's ambitious vision for Akon City has faced significant hurdles, both structural and cultural. The complex regulatory environment and persistent issues with corruption and infrastructure have undoubtedly hampered progress. More subtly, the friction between Akon, as a high-profile member of the Senegalese diaspora, and local attitudes might have further contributed to the project's stagnation. The clash between his expectations of support and the reality of skepticism or even hostility from his own countrymen presents a poignant reminder of the challenges faced by diaspora entrepreneurs. Ultimately, the failure to bridge these gaps—between international ambition and local realities, between business expectations and cultural perceptions—has left Akon City as little more than a vision for the time being. The future of the project will depend on addressing both the practical and relational issues that have so far derailed its progress. 9
EDITOR-IN-CHIEFS RÉDACTEURS EN CHEF Anna McAllister Pablo Mhanna-Sandoval SOCIAL MEDIA DIRECTOR DIRECTRICE DES RÉSEAUX SOCIAUX Gabrielle Torrealba DIRECTOR OF DISTRIBUTION DIRECTEUR DE DISTRIBUTION Jessica Keer Li ART DIRECTOR AND LAYOUT E DITOR DIRECTRICE ARTISTIQUE ET ÉDITRICE DE MISE EN PAGE Souang Wu CONTRIBUTORS CONTRIBUTEURS Ali Hachem The Jewish Law Students Association (JLSA) Special thanks to Prairie Koo for designing the layout. ~ The Quid Novi is published weekly by the students of the Faculty of Law at McGill University. Production is made possible through the direct support of students. All contents copyright © 2024 Quid Novi.
Les opinions exprimées sont propres aux auteurs et ne réflètent pas nécessairement celles de l’équipe du Quid Novi. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the McGill Law Students’ Association or of McGill University. Envoyez vos commentaires ou articles avant jeudi 17h00 à quid.law@mcgill.ca. Toute contribution doit indiquer le nom de l’auteur, son année d’étude ainsi qu’un titre et un sous -titre pour l’article. Les images doivent être soumises séparément. L’article ne sera publié qu’à la discrétion du comité de rédaction, qui basera sa décision sur la politique de rédaction disponible sur notre Facebook @quidnovi.mcgill.