Search results

SummaryIn light of the increased risks nowadays faced by much greater numbers of peacekeepers in hostile environments, the author surveys the legal sources for their safety and protection. The article first describes the kinds of personnel that may be engaged in peacekeeping operations before exploring the legal rights of protection that attach to each of them. It shows that many conventions, especially those relating to immunities of United Nations personnel as well as humanitarian and human rights treaties, contain general provisions that may be interpreted to include peacekeepers, but that none are aimed directly at thdr problems and protection. None, that is, until the United Nations adopted the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel in the fall of 1994. When that Convention comes into force, it will impose affirmative duties on states to ensure the safety and security of peacekeepers and will apply criminal sanctions against individuals who attack them or their property. The article concludes that the new convention casts a wide net of protection over peacekeepers but suffers from two significant lacunae. It will not cover peacekeepers who are combatants (and the criteria for that characterization are unclear) or personnel engaged in non-United Nations peacekeeping operations.

Two years have passed since the previous comment on consumer law in this journal but surprisingly little provincial development has taken place. Consequently, this note will chiefly highlight the particular impact of changes in federal law for Nova Scotians. Provincial Activity In 1975 important additions were made to the Consumer Protection Act that were the subject of comment at the time.1 This impression of momentum created by the new department responsible for consumer affairs has disappointingly been lost. In the interim the minister has been raised to full cabinet rank and his responsibilities widened, but little reformatory legislation has been introduced. To his power to protect consumers in the marketplace was added an obligation to administer Nova Scotia's part in the fight against inflation. In the name of the same struggle a Rent Review Act was passed. The statute controls increases in rents on residential properties and subjects landlords to regulation by a newly established Rent Review Commission. Responsibility for the administration of this semi-autonomous agency also lies with the Minister for Consumer Affairs.

While political observers were commenting upon the dullness of the 1975' spring session of the Legislature, something approaching a quiet revolution was taking place in Consumer Law. Changes were heralded in January 1975 when the amendments of late 19732 to the Consumer Services Act were proclaimed in force. The amendments expanded the functions of the Consumer Services Bureau and, most importantly, permitted for the first time the appointment of a minister of Cabinet rank to administer the Act. A few days before the Legislature met in March, Dr. Maynard McAskill was named to that position. The new minister wasted no time in acting. The first bill in the Assembly was introduced by him. In all, three consumer bills were passed during the sitting. In order of introduction they were Bill 1, the Collection Agencies Act,4Bill 36, 5 being amendments to the Consumer Protection Act, 6 and Bill 116, The Direct Sellers' Licensing and Regulation Act. 7 This note will comment on each in turn.

The reach of national law is often greater than its grasp. Canada, like other countries, has effective legal power over its territory and all within it. However, one consequence of the current process of globalization, for good or ill, is that Canadian interests are no longer contained exclusively within Canadian borders. Canada thus finds it increasingly necessary to consider asserting its legal jurisdiction beyond its frontiers. Such extraterritorial assertion of Canadian authority may well run into strong opposition from other countries, who might view Canada as attempting to intervene in their own national territory and domestic affairs. Likewise, other states, under the same pressures of globalization as Canada, may try to exercise their legislative powers, government decrees and court orders in the territory of Canada, where they are likely to be rebuffed with equal indignation. Yet the rapidly growing volume and variety of transnational interactions between people, activities and events, which constitute the engine of globalization, ensure that the extraterritorial application of national legal powers cannot be avoided. Consequently, the scope, means and effectiveness of extraterritorial action must be examined and evaluated.This paper was co-authored with Teresa Scassa, Professor at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law (teresa.scassa@uottawa.ca).