THE ADVOCATE 429
VOL. 76 PART 3 MAY 2018
been the hiring of new faculty. We have been living through a period of generational
change, as faculty members hired in the 1970s and 1980s move
into retirement. As will be clear from the profiles of new faculty in our previous
columns in the Advocate, we have continued to buttress our strength
across all fields.
In terms of programs, too, we have continued to innovate. In the last five
years we have founded an innovative student support structure which, for
the first time, brings a dedicated counsellor into the faculty; we have
expanded the co-op program so that entry into that program is no longer
subject to a lottery; we have completely rebuilt our Moot Court so that it can
serve as a lab for the use of technology in dispute settlement, is easily convertible
to a range of different dispute settlement techniques and is accessible;
we have founded a new Centre for Excellence in Access to Justice; we
have completely refinanced and reorganized the Environmental Law Centre;
we have continued to build our scholarship and bursary funds; and we
have collaborated closely with the Law Society of British Columbia on several
initiatives with respect to the interface between law school and practice.
Many of those reading this column have contributed hugely to those
initiatives. We sincerely thank you.
We have sought to develop the J.D./J.I.D. so that it enriches the experience
of all students and detracts from the experience of none. Students in
the J.D. program will benefit directly, for example, from the areas of expertise
of the six additional faculty members, for those faculty will be teaching
in both J.D. and J.I.D.-specific courses. In addition, we are building ways in
which all students can benefit from what the J.D./J.I.D. students have
learned from their experience in communities. We have been clear throughout
that we will remain one faculty. We must prevent the emergence of two
solitudes. This is about learning to live in relationship, not about separation.
We will not, then, be creating two separate faculties at UVic Law. I confess,
however, that there is a sense in which the process of instituting the
J.D./J.I.D. does feel more like the creation of a new law school than the creation
of a new program.
First, the J.D./J.I.D. is not merely about a specific area of law. It is more
accurate to say that it is about looking at the whole of law through a new set
of lenses. The J.D./J.I.D.’s implications—its ambitions—are much more farreaching
than most programmatic developments.
Second, like any great law school, the new program will have to internalize
divergent viewpoints on the questions it addresses. The program can have no