• Marlys Edwardh, Barry Adam, Lucie Joncas, and Michaela Clayton.
• Ruby & Edwardh.
• HIV AIDS Policy Law Rev. 2009 Dec 1; 14 (2): 99-104.

AbstractJustice Edwin Cameron, of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, served as moderator. He said that this topic was particularly relevant for "an African/Canadian setting" because African countries may use Canadian developments as justification for their efforts to address HIV transmission and exposure through criminal law. Justice Cameron said that Canada is internationally perceived as a human rights-respecting state and, thus, sets an example, particularly for African nations, on how to comply with human rights issues. He added that in this particular case, however, Canada was sending the wrong message. This article contains summaries of the four presentations made during this panel. Marlys Edwardh reviews how the Supreme Court of Canada in Cuerrier interpreted the concepts of "endangering life" and "fraud". Barry Adam discusses the notion of a "duty to disclose" and how this affects HIV prevention. Lucie Joncas examines how the Supreme Court defined "fraud" in Cuerrier and describes a case before the Quebec Court of Appeal which may turn on whether the use of a condom or having a low viral load is considered not to constitute a significant risk of transmission. Finally, Michaela Clayton describes the trend in Southern African countries to adopt laws criminalizing HIV transmission or exposure, and explains that criminalization endangers women's health and lives.

9 keywords...

hide…