Interview – Legal Expert – Dr. Emir Crowne – Part 1 of 3

Charter Project filmed and edited interviews with legal experts and others who can offer unique historical perspectives on The Charter, its inception, and how it affects the everyday lives of Canadians. This is our first of three excerpts from our interview with Windsor Law Professor Dr. Emir Crowne.

Dr. Emir Crowne, Associate Professor at the University of Windsor, Faculty of Law

Dr. Crowne has been a member of the Faculty of Law since 2007.

His research interests include all aspects of Intellectual Property (domestic, comparative and international), Information Technology Law (broadly defined), the Legal Profession (in particular, issues of Access, Diversity and Equity), Legal Education & Mooting, Human Rights, Gaming Law and Contract Drafting / Negotiation. Professor Crowne has worked in-house for several publicly traded IT companies and negotiated and managed several multi-million dollar contracts. He has also drafted and filed several dozen patent and trade-mark applications, in Canada, the US and Europe.

Professor Crowne is also an appointed member of the Justices of the Peace Review Council which has a mandate to receive and investigate complaints against justices of the peace, review and approve standards of conduct, deal with the continuing education plan and decide whether a justice of the peace may engage in other remunerative work.

Professor Crowne received the “Professor of the Year” award in 2008, 2009 and again in 2010. He is the Founder of the Canadian Law Student Conference – the only LLB or JD level conference of its kind in Canada. In 2010, he received the “Young Practitioner Award” from the South Asian Bar Association (Toronto). Professor Crowne is also the Founder and Co-Chair of the Harold G. Fox Intellectual Property Moot,  the Donald G. Bowman National Tax Moot, and the John G. Fleming Torts Moot.

He is, or has been, Faculty Advisor to the Women & Law Group, the Windsor Intellectual Property and Information Technology Group, the South Asian Law Students Association, and the Black Law Students Association. He is also a former Member of the University Senate, and past Vice President of Women’s Issues, Diversity & Equity for the Union. He currently Chairs a Judicial Panel at the University.

In 2011, he was also the “Style Counsel” for Precedent Magazine.

 

Other legal expert interviewees include:

  • The Honourable Justice Ian Binnie (former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada)
  • The Honourable Justice Frank Iacobucci (former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada)
  • The Honourable Roy McMurtry (Former Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Appeal, and key participant in the drafting of The Charter)
  • R. Douglas Elliott (counsel at the Supreme Court of Canada on the Reference Re Same Sex Marriage decision)
  • Senator Jerry Grafstein (advisor to Prime Minister Trudeau when The Charter was drafted)
  • John Whyte   (Constitutional advisor in the Government of Saskatchewan during the years leading up to the patriation of the Constitution)
  • Jean Teillet (Aboriginal rights litigator)
  • André Marin (Ombudsman of Ontario)
  • Patrick Ducharme (Criminal Lawyer, Ducharme Fox LLP)
  • Jill D. Makepeace (Criminal Lawyer, Greenspan Humphrey Lavine Barristers)
  • Windsor Law Professors: W.A. Bogart, Emir Crowne, Bruce Elman, Laverne Jacobs, Jasminka Kalajdzic, Richard Moon and David Tanovich

 

CREDITS


One Comment on Interview – Legal Expert – Dr. Emir Crowne – Part 1 of 3

  • BLocke

    I’m not surprised that these opinions have been expressed by a law professor. It clearly and concisely demonstrates why Canadians, by and large, have no understanding of what rights are, given that our institutions of higher learning are apparently wholly ignorant on the subject.

    All rights are paired with responsibilities. In order for one to have a “right” to shelter or food someone else has to bear the responsibility of providing it to them. Who would the learned professor suggest that is, and how would the state enforce such responsibilities without violating the actual rights of that individual to their property and to keep the products of their labour?

    The concept of a right to food, shelter and employment are not advances in legal thinking. Those where fundamental rights of all Soviet citizens. The problem is that real rights co-locate rights and responsibilities in one individual. I have the right to my property, but I also have responsibility for that property. It is no one else’s responsibility to maintain it, insure it or to provide it for me.

    If I demand a right to free food or shelter, I am demanding that the government extort someone else to bring me these goods through coercive force. If it’s someone else’s responsibility to provide me with food, shelter and medical care, what need have I to work? If I am somehow mandated to work, who do I have to work for? Can I demand employment from anyone? Is employment a right?

    Once you understand how the language of rights has been polluted by such assertions, you’ll begin to understand why people like the learned professor here are actually advocating for a society where one has no rights by making real rights meaninglessly diluted in the same soup as wants and privileges.

    Words are important, and it’s very disappointing that someone who is ostensibly educating our future legal experts doesn’t know what rights are.

     
Join the discussion.

Be cool, no smack talk. If you like what you read, spread the word! Basic HTML is allowed in posts. Fields marked with * are required to post a comment.