to these matters in legal practices. As UVic Law expands its ability to learn
and teach about relationships, not only between individuals but also
between communities and legal orders, questions of form and process will
continue to be significant.5 How can technology be used to enhance our
attention to the ways law is learned and manifested on particular lands?
How does technology affect our understanding of what is “central” and what
is “remote”? What are the legally or pedagogically relevant differences
between the technologies of the videoconference and the technologies of a
mask or dance? Electronic communication and social media show great
potential for promoting the accessibility and revitalization of Indigenous
laws, with attention to the legal adequacy of processes continuing to be central.
6 We are hopeful that the Dispute Resolution Room will serve as an
experimental studio for studying communication, persuasion and relationships
against the demands of complex and multiple forms of justice.
748 V O L . 7 5 P A R T 5 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 7 THE ADVOCATE
1. For a description and photographs of the Dispute
Resolution Room, see p 24 of the spring 2017 issue
of UVic Law’s alumni magazine Vistas, online:
2. See Criminal Code, RSC 1985, C-46, s 486.2. The
Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the constitutionality
of these provisions in R v S(JZ), 2010 SCC 1.
3. For a sustained discussion of the significance of inperson
testimony and demeanour evidence in relation
to norms of equality, religious freedom and trial
t t t t t
fairness, see R v NS, 2012 SCC 72.
4. See Canadian Broadcasting Corp v Canada (Attorney
General), 2011 SCC 2.
5. For a discussion of the importance of attending to
legal form and process in thinking about legal theory
and legal pluralism, see Kristen Rundle, Forms
Liberate: Reclaiming the Jurisprudence of Lon L Fuller
(Oxford: Hart, 2012).
6. For resources and research on the revitalization of
Indigenous laws, see the Indigenous Law Research
Unit’s website: <www.uvic.ca/law/about/indigenous