Tag: editorial

In the Canadian justice system, alleged perpetrators are judged by a jury of their peers. It is up to the jury to decide whether the person that has been charged with a crime by the police, is in fact guilty of said crime. Up until that point, according to Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a person is presumed innocent:

“Any person charged with an offence has the right …(d) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.”

For this reason, it is hard to say that the McGill administration, in the case of the alleged rape of a former Concordia student by members of its football team, has acted inappropriately.

Although we do not deny the victim’s allegations, the fact remains that despite being charged by the Montreal police, the football players have not been shown to be guilty in a court of law. For the McGill administration to take action would mean superseding the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. McGill must act according to the players’ rights to be presumed innocent.

What is deplorable, however, is that the alleged incident happened in 2011 and the matter is only being brought to court this December.

These alleged perpetrators have been allowed to continue their normal lives for nearly three years, while the suspected victim has had no justice and has moved away, most likely to be as far from these men as possible.

Therefore, the problem is not that the McGill administration has taken no action, but rather that the Canadian Criminal Justice system is too slow to take action.

It is difficult for a community to provide support for rape victims without falling into the trap of presumption of guilt. Despite how we might feel about rape, it is unfair to call someone a rapist until it has been lawfully proven.

Although we are inclined to believe the victim, mistakes in naming perpetrators have been made in other situations and everyone has the right to defend themselves. We cannot allow ourselves to only hear one side of the story. We must hear both sides before declaring someone a monster.

In 2006, three members of the Duke University lacrosse team in Durham, North Carolina, were accused of rape. The community was incensed and the players were labelled as criminals and verbally brutalized by the media and community members.

As it turns out, the investigation, namely DNA and alibi evidence, proved that these three men were innocent. However, the damage was irreparably done. Not only were the players’ names dragged through the mud and forever tainted, but the university’s image suffered as well. And all because these men were presumed guilty.

The McGill administration is not alone in allowing members of its sports teams to continue playing despite pending criminal charges.

Colorado Avalanche goalie, Semyon Varlamov, was charged with second-degree kidnapping and third-degree assault of his girlfriend and he continues to play professionally.

Varlamov will likely keep playing until the court renders a decision. The football players in question will soon be graduating. If the allegations against them prove to be true, the reputations of McGill and Colorado Avalanche will be tainted, but there is nothing they can do without violating the players’ rights.

The justice system needs to speed up the process for trying these cases. Until a decision is rendered on the guilt or innocence of alleged perpetrators everyone suffers.

Sources:

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=689289

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case

The Concordian strives to be a publication of integrity, which is why we have chosen not to publish photos which portray members of a certain student association allegedly using illegal substances.

The Concordian does not deal in “yellow journalism.” Yellow journalism places the focus on articles that are “sensational.” These types of articles are most often given prominence in tabloid magazines.

It is our belief that to publish such a photo would not serve a legitimate purpose. Although the picture in question involves members of a Concordia student association, we have confirmed that funds from the student association were not used to purchase said illegal substances, nor does the association condone the partaking of these substances. Furthermore, the photos were taken at an event that took place off-campus and which did not involve the university.

What people choose to do in their personal time is not our concern and, although publishing such a photo may titillate our readers, it would only serve to humiliate and hurt those involved.

Although we recognize the importance of the governance of student associations,  we do not feel as though their personal choices need to be publicized so long as their choices do not affect their promises to the student community they serve.

This issue brings to mind the current mayoral debacle in Toronto. Toronto Police have informed the public that they are in possession of a video which shows Mayor Rob Ford using a crack pipe. Since reports of this video first surfaced, the public has been titillated by this story, amused no doubt by the embarrassment the city of Toronto is enduring on account of the alleged disreputable behavior of their Mayor. However, the fact remains that the video is not absolute proof that Mr.Ford has partaken of crack cocaine. A photo or video can be misleading in that it does not present the whole truth of the situation.

Yes, Mr. Ford is a public figure;yes, these alleged actions reflect negatively on his city and yes, the activity in question is illegal. However, is there a purpose being served by disseminating this information?

The allegation that Mr. Ford has partaken of illegal substances has not affected his approval ratings. His council has lost faith in him, but not the public. Therefore, the publication of Mr. Ford’s alleged drug use has served only to embarrass him and Toronto.

There is no evidence that suggests that Mr. Ford is a regular crack cocaine user. There has been no indication that Mr. Ford’s job performance has been affected by the one alleged incidence of him with a crack pipe. All that can be gleaned from this is that Mr. Ford made a mistake. Ultimately, we tend to expect better from our elected representatives but these people are human and do make mistakes.

What should determine the worth of an elected official is their record in office, not what activities they may partake of in their free time.

Since it is our belief that the revelation of video evidence alleging a single instance of Mr. Ford using drugs has not served a worthwhile purpose, so too do we believe that publicizing the use of illegal substances by student association members in their free time is not worthwhile. That being said, we will remain vigilant. If it is discovered that these elected representatives are behaving in ways which would shed a negative light on Concordia and its student associations, then we will report it to our readers.

 

If you haven’t already heard, it’s important for young people, (citizens 18 to 24-years-old), to vote.

Candidates and mainstream media are constantly pushing the importance of the “youth” vote in the electoral process. According to Elections Canada, “When politicians know in advance that most young people don’t vote, they may be less interested in making the effort to be responsive to issues that matter to younger Canadians.”

However, there is a fundamental issue with the terms “youth” and “young.” The age at which a Canadian is eligible to vote is 18. Although, the age of majority (the age at which a person is considered by law to be an adult), varies by province between 18 and 19, at the age of 18, a person is an adult not a youth. And yet individuals in Canada between the ages of 18 and 24 are constantly addressed as “young.”

There are numerous campaigns trying to encourage the “youth” to vote because, according to the numbers, not many 18 to 24-year-olds do. Elections Canada reports individuals in this age category had a turnout rate of 38.8 per cent in the 2011 general election. However, there was a total turnout rate of 61.4 per cent. This means that the “youth” made up nearly half of the number of voters.

Therefore, the issue is not so much that the youth aren’t voting, but that Canadians in general aren’t voting.

Eighteen to 24-year-olds are not babies; they are adults. They do not need to be coddled. Rather than addressing this age group as special and devoting energy and resources to get them to vote, more attention needs to be paid to Canadians as a whole.

Although your age may make you one of the younger Canadian voters, you are still an adult. You are still a Canadian citizen whose right to vote influences the way Canada is run, what decisions are made and who gets to make them. If, by the age of 18, you don’t understand why voting is important for a democracy to function, then it is the Canadian school system that has failed. However, if you do understand the importance of voting but don’t bother to inform yourself about the candidates and the issues and don’t vote, then it is unfortunate that you don’t want to participate in Canada’s electoral process. Hopefully, you’re willing to accept whatever results come about as a development of the people elected.

Furthermore, to divide issues into categories such as “issues that matter to younger Canadians,” is to imply that only the youth are concerned about issues that involve young Canadians, and that these same Canadians are not interested in issues that involve other age groups or Canadians as a whole. Canadians of any age should be concerned about issues that affect those younger than them and those older than them. You can’t separate yourself from an issue because it doesn’t involve your age group. One day you may be a senior, one day you may have kids, one day you may need certain services that you don’t need right now but that are currently being voted on. Therefore, the focus shouldn’t be on candidates addressing issues that concern younger Canadians, because these issues should be a concern for everyone no matter their age.

Campaigns should be devoted to encouraging Canadians of all ages to get involved with the way their country is run and not on overindulging “young” voters, who if they are adult enough to vote, are adult enough not to need someone to pander to them.

The beginning of fall also marks the beginning of many, many fundraising campaigns. To name a few, there’s the Montreal Walk 4 Friendship, Movember, the Federation CJA annual campaign and Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Not to mention the request for donations that organizations promote all year long.

With so many campaigns and organizations asking for donations, how is a student supposed to respond?

Many students live on a tight budget but many students are also inclined to want to help worthwhile campaigns raise money. This is perhaps best exemplified by the number of Concordia student participants in Movember.

However, it isn’t fair to expect a student to be able to donate to all campaigns or that they can afford to donate at all. So, how does one decide who to donate to, how much to donate or whether to donate at all?

Donating one’s time is a good alternative to monetary donations, but like cash, a student’s time can also be in short supply.

It’s difficult to pit one cause against another and deem one to be more worthy, so how can you decide which cause to donate to?

If you want to be democratic about it you could seek information from Charity Intelligence Canada. This organization researches the effectiveness and efficiency of charities in Canada. On its website you will find its top 12 Canadian charity picks, a list of 100 major charities and information about donating to large cause charities such as cancer, the environment and homelessness.

Or you could simply choose to support the charity one of your friends or relatives is involved in. Unless, a number of people you know are involved in the same or different charities. In that case you might want to help out the person who is farthest from reaching their fundraising goal.

How much is an acceptable amount to donate?

According to an article published on money.cnn.com by Jean Chatzky, Money Magazine editor at large, it’s important to consider your budget. If you know that in the fall months there’s going to be people asking you for money, you should look at your budget to determine how much you are able to give and factor that amount into your regular spending. Then, based on the amount you have available to donate, you can decide how much to give to each charity of your choice.

The ultimate question, however, is do you have to donate at all? If you don’t have money to spare and donating to a charity will mean going without, then you shouldn’t feel obligated to give.

You are entitled to spend your money however you choose and you shouldn’t have to sacrifice for a fundraiser. Students are a small fraction of the population. A fundraiser shouldn’t need to depend on students to succeed.

Donating to a cause is a wonderful gesture,but you should always consider what is feasible and reasonable for you and if you can’t contribute to the fundraising season, you shouldn’t feel bad. Perhaps when you have the funds you can make up for it.

Yes, Concordia University is a public institution. But it’s also an institution of learning with spaces designed for use by Concordia students, faculty and staff. When these spaces, such as the library are made accessible to non-Concordia members, priority use and safety becomes an issue.

Access to spaces such as the library should be reserved for members of the Concordia community. In other words, people of the public, such as the man caught touching himself in front of female students, should be prevented from entering the library in the first place.

According to the Concordia library website, members of the public can purchase a “Concordia University Library Privilege Card,” which allows them to take out library materials and apply for a guest account for use of the computers, and this makes Privilege Card holders  members of the Concordia community.

The library is for study, research and computer use. Anyone who is not a member of the Concordia community does not have any business being in the library.

Security should restrict access to the library to members of the Concordia community by having members present their I.D. or Privilege Cards.

During the student strike, security barred access to the library to anyone who did not have a Concordia I.D. or Privilege Card. This was done, presumably, for the safety of Concordia members. What has changed?

Well, for starters there’s an acknowledged pervert bothering female students while they’re trying to study. And we’re not talking about one occurrence. It has happened multiple times and yet the doors to the library remain open for anyone to come in.

Students have the right to feel safe in their university, especially in the spaces designed to accommodate their study.

On Oct. 3, Concordia University posted a message on their Facebook page stating, “Although rare and unfortunate, cases of inappropriate behaviour on Concordia’s campus do happen, as they do in other public areas.”

“Other public areas?” The university library is not just any “other public area,” it is the centre of study and research for students on campus. Our tuition fees contribute to the maintenance and upkeep of the library so that we can use it, and its natural to expect the university to ensure entrants are there for valid reasons that do not include wandering in off the street and threatening students. It is expected that someone could possibly approach you inappropriately whilst sitting in Starbucks or at a food court, but schools, whether or not they are classified as “public,” are expected to be safe places.

So far no one has been seriously injured, but that doesn’t mean that it couldn’t happen. Public shouldn’t mean that security at Concordia will only take action after the fact, Concordia should put preventative measures in place to reduce the risk to their community members who come to Concordia expecting a safe, clean place to study.

 

Beginning last week and continuing into this week, Concordia’s student associations have been hosting orientation events with varied themes and activities. However, the common theme among all Frosh events at Concordia, seems to be the prevalence of alcohol. Whether it’s pub crawls, beach parties or barbecues, freshman are provided with plenty to drink. But should Frosh events be encouraging the consumption of alcohol? Is it appropriate for a Frosh to be sponsored by a beer company? Past experience tells us that alcohol can be a dangerous substance if consumed irresponsibly, so should we really be welcoming students to campus life by getting them drunk? Is that not setting a bad precedent?

It’s not wrong to consume alcohol, but the amount of activities that feature alcohol consumption at these Frosh events is alarming. After all, these events are for students new to campus and given the number of alcohol and accident fatalities that occur on campuses, shouldn’t our student associations want to discourage correlating university life with excessive drinking?

According to Health Canada, between four and five million Canadians engage in excessive drinking. Alcohol abuse has been linked to several fatalities and a number of injuries at universities in Canada in the past couple of years. In September 2010, a first year student at Queen’s University died after falling out of a sixth-floor window. The coroner ruled that his death was related to his alcohol consumption. The previous year, September 2009, an inebriated Guelph University football player assaulted another drunken student, resulting in said student being left with irreparable brain damage. That football player is currently serving a four-and-a-half year prison sentence.

As reported by past attendees of Concordia Frosh events, students are given a limited number of free drinks but they are able to purchase an unlimited amount. And why wouldn’t you buy more drinks? It’s the theme of Frosh. Everyone around you is drinking. Heck, if you’re a JMSB student then your Frosh was sponsored by the Molson beer company. With all this peer and commercial encouragement to drink, what’s to stop a student from going overboard? And if not today, then what about tomorrow? Frosh makes drinking seem like the university norm, especially when drinking events take place on campus. But, should our university really be sanctioning events that encourage associating university life with alcohol?

So far, Concordia hasn’t been as unlucky as Queen’s University, and there haven’t been any fatalities or serious injuries as a result of alcohol consumption. But isn’t it better to prevent an accident before it happens? Pub crawls and alcohol company sponsorship needs to go and events providing alcohol should limit the amount served and take place in a controlled environment.

There really is more to university than getting wasted, and student associations should promote those aspects of university rather than the “party” life, which let’s be honest, can only lead to trouble.

And so it begins…another year, another semester, another slew of essays, exams, social obligations and sleepless nights. If this idea depresses you, our apologies, but it’s time to face facts. University can be rewarding but it can also be hard. In their study, “The prevalence and socio-demographic correlations of depression, anxiety and stress among a group of university students,” Nuran Bayram and Nazan Bilgel discovered that among 1,617 students, 27.1 per cent demonstrated moderate to severe signs of depression, 47.1 per cent showed moderate to severe signs of anxiety and 27 per cent were moderately to severely stressed. If this doesn’t ring true to you then congratulations, it would appear you’re doing just fine; for the rest of us the start of school is the deep breath before the plunge.

In their study published July 17,  the Canadian Organization of University and College Health, in which 30,000 students were surveyed, 90 per cent said that university left them feeling overwhelmed.  This clearly illustrates that university IS hard and we need to stop denying it. Stop downplaying the toll university life takes on mental health. All involved, from students and university administrators to faculty, need to more fully accept (and plan for) university’s demanding effects on mental and physical well-being.

Stop encouraging students to complete their studies in a certain amount of time. Place less emphasis on grade and grade point averages. Create a flexible exam schedule. Give students who need it more time for assignments. Providing counselling and mental health services is all well and good but talking only does so much to relieve stress and anxiety when the 1,000 word paper is due tomorrow. And sure, you can plan to your heart’s desire to get things done in a timely manner, but things don’t always go according to plan. Sometimes assignments take longer to complete than the time you’ve allotted to them. It doesn’t help that cramming involves less sleep, which in turn exacerbates stress, anxiety and depression.

Furthermore, education only gets you so far in the workplace these days. Employers want to see more than just your degree on your resume. Becky Wareham, a graduate recruiting manager for the wine company Waitrose is quoted as saying that her company is looking “for exceptional, rounded, ambitious individuals who can show sustained involvement in activities other than the purely academic, such as work experience, industrial placements and voluntary work in the UK or abroad,” in an article by The Telegraph, Aug. 4.  In the same article, Tricia Moon, director at Bell Pottinger, a personal relations and marketing group, says that her company wants more than just a degree — they want field-related work experience.

The question then is how should stressed out students appropriately plan for future careers when they’re simultaneously crushed under the weight of academic responsibility. Something needs to change, because the truth is, students are more often than not a reflection of our cover photo, and that’s just not healthy.