Congress 2021: research, sessions and participation

The two original programmes and how to use them

The English originals are preserved unchanged. Version dated 15 May 2021; the online meeting was scheduled for 2–4 June 2021.

• Detailed programme — PDF, 22 pages, 327186 bytes
• Short programme — PDF, 6 pages, 231381 bytes

Both files match the SHA-1 digests recorded for their 21 May 2021 Wayback captures. Page locators count physical PDF pages from 1. All times are MDT as printed, not converted local times.

2 June 2021

1. 1.1 · 09:00–10:15 MDT — Migration and marginalization. Long p.1 · Short p.1.
2. 1.2 · 10:30–11:45 MDT — Arctic oceans roundtable. Long p.2–3 · Short p.1.
3. Workshop · 11:45–13:00 MDT — Careers beyond academia. Long p.4 · Short p.1.
4. 1.3 · 13:00–14:15 MDT — Law and Indigeneity. Long p.4–5 · Short p.2.
5. 1.4 · 14:30–15:45 MDT — Policies and policing: sex work, trafficking and pornography. Long p.6–7 · Short p.2.

3 June 2021

1. 2.1 · 09:00–10:15 MDT — Frances Henry keynote: racism and protest. Long p.8 · Short p.2.
2. 2.2 · 10:30–11:45 MDT — Parenting and power. Long p.8–10 · Short p.3.
3. 2.3 · 13:00–14:15 MDT — Access and collective rights. Long p.10–12 · Short p.3.
4. Co-sponsored · 14:00–14:59 MDT — Presenting academic research. Long p.12 · Short p.4.
5. 2.4 · 14:30–15:45 MDT — Legal geography, heritage and cities. Long p.13–14 · Short p.4.

4 June 2021

1. 3.1 · 09:00–10:15 MDT — Environmental and social regulation. Long p.14–17 · Short p.4–5.
2. 3.2 · 10:30–11:45 MDT — Schools, homes and courtrooms. Long p.17–19 · Short p.5.
3. 3.3 · 13:00–14:15 MDT — Language, culture and public space. Long p.19–21 · Short p.5–6.
4. 3.4 · 14:30–15:45 MDT — Reframing inclusion. Long p.21–22 · Short p.6.

These are short topic labels, not transcriptions of the original titles. The short programme prints 14:00–14:59 for the co-sponsored event; its overlap with other sessions is preserved.

Compare two records without inventing a roster

1. Record the session number, date, time zone and page in each version.
2. Transcribe the exact title, people and roles separately. Do not automatically merge the two lists.
3. Mark any disagreement and seek a later record before claiming actual participation.

Checkable example: for the first paper in session 1.1, the long programme names Megan Gaucher; the short version also lists Amala Kotiuga and Veronica Øeverlid. The versions therefore differ. Likewise, the programme names Tina Piper for session 3.1, while the CV cited above attributes a moderation role to Alexandra Bahary-Dionne.

An abstract is not a full paper; a scheduled appearance is not proof of attendance.

Three CVs supply presentation records. Organizer material supplies a planned paper, one reported session and association dates. The original programmes linked here supply the planned timetable; actual participation still needs separate evidence.

File provenance

• Wayback — long version
• Wayback — short version

Recovered participant records

University CVs record presentations on migrant justice and online-hearing access. An organizer profile lists Ling Chen’s climate-law education presentation and CLSA endorsement. These selected records help identify research themes. The two original programmes linked here now supply the planned timetable and abstracts.

School policing: a fourth contribution

Lisa M. Kelly’s March 2022 curriculum vitae records this Toronto-focused paper at the virtual Canadian Law and Society Association conference in June 2021. The CV lists a separate presentation with the same title at the Law and Society Association in May 2021. These are two events, not two versions of the Congress programme.

Environmental and social regulation: a dated panel

Alexandra Bahary-Dionne’s 2025 CV places Environmental and Social Regulation: Lessons for the Future in its panel-moderation section. It identifies the CLSA annual meeting, held online on 4 June 2021. This is the role recorded in the CV, not a paper-authorship claim. The programme prepared on 15 May 2021 instead names Tina Piper as chair/discussant for session 3.1 on 4 June. Preserve both attributions: these records do not establish who actually chaired on the day.

The CV identifies Alexandra Bahary-Dionne as moderator on 4 June 2021. It does not name the other panel participants or give a timetable. Record this as the CV’s attribution; compare it with the planned chair in programme session 3.1 linked here.

Trace a contribution

1. Start with an exact paper title and named author.
2. Check association and date: LSA and CLSA are different meetings.
3. Separate a pre-event announcement from a retrospective presentation record.
4. Record missing chair, panel and time as unknown rather than filling gaps.

A worked distinction

The McGill CV distinguishes the CLSA presentation on 4 June 2021 from a differently titled LSA presentation on 27 May 2021. Preserve both conference identities; matching an author or topic does not make them the same session.

Limits of this recovery

The original long and short programmes are available below: 22 and 6 complete pages, version dated 15 May 2021. They establish a planned timetable for 2–4 June, not actual delivery or attendance. CVs, organizer profiles and the roundtable report remain separate evidence. A report or award-profile publication date is not independently a presentation date.

A further CV records one panel-moderation role and an exact day. Compare that retrospective record with the two original programmes linked here.

Another 2021 Association contribution

Danardo Jones lists a virtual Canadian Law and Society Association paper presentation titled Darkscapes in 2021. His record supplies no exact date or panel and does not explicitly identify Congress2021.

2–4 June 2021: which fee was zero?

The Federation’s 2021 schedule identifies CLSA/ACDS as association 229 and marks June 2, 3 and 4. Its association-conference fee is shown as $0 for members and non-members. The registration instructions distinguish this fee from Congress registration and association membership dues; this row does not show the total cost of attending Congress.

The columns run May 27–June 4; CLSA’s marks correspond to June 2, 3 and 4.

Association 229, meeting June 2–4, 2021: $0 for members and non-members. This is not the total Congress cost.

Arctic oceans: six perspectives

Valerie Leow’s Federation report, published 3 June 2021, describes a CLSA open roundtable. The report’s publication date is not a confirmed session date.

Use the session to structure a reading note

Choose one decision, rather than treating “Arctic governance” as a single undifferentiated subject. The following worksheet is an reading method, not a transcript of the roundtable or a statement of applicable law.

1. Define the decision and place: a proposed shipping route, a fishery-management measure or a habitat-protection proposal. Record whether the document discusses a proposal, an adopted rule or observed practice.
2. Identify affected people in the source. Separate the people described by an author from participants who supplied evidence and those with a documented decision-making role. Do not infer consent from consultation alone.
3. Record evidence type and scope: interview, local observation, legal instrument or administrative record. Write the date, jurisdiction and locator. A general conference description supplies no local measurements.
4. Trace the proposed route for participation and review. Record a named process only if the source specifies it; otherwise write an unanswered question. Verify any present-day legal route against its current official instrument.
5. Finish with a bounded conclusion: what this source establishes, what it leaves open and which document would answer the next question. Keep your interpretation separate from the speaker’s recorded topic.

Start with one decision. Check affected people, evidence, participation and review. For every check record a source, a locator and an unresolved question.

Worked example: a proposed supply route

Suppose you are reading a fictional proposal to change a vessel’s supply route. It says community access and wildlife effects will be considered but gives no meeting record, habitat data or review procedure. Your note can identify the proposed change and the two stated concerns. It cannot conclude that a community agreed, that impacts were measured or that a permit was granted.

Monuments and public memory: a planned contribution

The Federation’s 25 May 2021 graduate-award profile identifies Mirosław M. Sadowski, then a McGill DCL candidate endorsed by CLSA, and his planned contribution on monuments as carriers of the past in societies emerging from oppression. It links law and policy to public memory, including decommunisation and decolonisation. The profile is pre-event evidence: it does not establish that the talk was delivered. “June 3” in the series title is not confirmation of this speaker’s session date. The original long programme, p.14, independently places this paper in session2.4 on 3 June2021; this establishes scheduling, not delivery.

1. Select a specific monument and one public decision about it. Record the jurisdiction, decision-making body, date and publicly available reasons.
2. Separate the legal power to act from the meanings attributed to the monument. Locate who makes each interpretation rather than writing that a whole community agrees.
3. Compare the chosen action with at least one alternative: preservation, contextualisation, relocation or removal. Record the evidence and who was consulted.
4. Finish with an explicit limit: a public record can show the institutional decision, but does not alone demonstrate how all residents experienced it.

Connect the decision’s legal basis to attributed meanings, compare alternatives, and state what the public record cannot establish.