IHRP Alumna Profile: An Interview with Ashley Major

Interview by Abdullah Khan (1L) 

Ashley Major ‘17 is a William C. Graham research associate with the IHRP. Photo Credit: Abdullah Khan. 
 

How did you end up in law school?

I am one of those people who always knew they wanted to attend law school. I had a very developed understanding of justice and injustice while growing up. I always wanted things to be fair. My mom likes to tell the story of me watching a courtroom scene as a 5 year-old and loudly declaring, “I want to do THAT when I grow up!” When I was actually old enough to understand what being a lawyer entailed, I did not waver from my kindergarten dream. But I knew it was going to be difficult. I did not know any lawyers. My parents did not have the funds to support my sisters and me past the age of 18. So I knew that once I left my family farm, all of my university and living expenses would be my own. I applied for every scholarship I could during high school, and eventually obtained a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Human Justice from the University of Regina. I then worked 2-3 jobs at a time over the next couple of years to save for law school. I used to bring my LSAT book with me to work. I would pull it out and do a couple of questions at a time when the tables at my waitressing job were quiet, or when I was working overnights at a women’s shelter.  My coworkers used to laugh at me carrying this shabby book around everywhere, but it paid off! I ultimately chose to attend U of T for law school. 

What were your main interests at law school?

I arguably went a little overboard with my commitments in law school, but I couldn’t help myself. I suddenly had access to organizations and networks that I never had back home in Saskatchewan. My lifelong passion has always been work relating to domestic and sexual violence. I seized every opportunity relating to these issues in law school. I volunteered with sex workers through Pro Bono Students Canada. I conducted research for the IHRP’s Women’s Rights Working Group and for the Asper Centre. I was Co-Chair of both the Women and the Law Committee and the Law Students for Social Change Committee. I discovered at exam time in 1L that I had put far more energy into my extracurriculars than I had into my law classes! But I am glad I took advantage of so many opportunities to gain legal knowledge outside of the classroom. In addition to my volunteer activities, I completed a year-long externship at the Barbra Schlifer Clinic, working on the immigration and family law files of women who had experienced intimate partner violence. I completed a summer internship at Human Rights Watch (Women’s Rights Division) in New York. I went on exchange to Amsterdam and took a course that brought me to the international tribunals. I mooted in the Walsh Family Law Moot, and then coached the U of T team the following year. I used every opportunity to volunteer and complete hands-on work, and I credit that with making law school a really positive experience for me. 

Did you have any experiences outside of law school that reinforced your interests?

Prior to law school, I worked as a domestic violence counselor for two years. I also worked as an on-call sexual assault counselor. I really value these experiences. As a front-line worker, I viscerally felt the trauma of a woman who had just been sexually assaulted. I saw the fear and frustration of a woman whose ex-partner continued to violate protection orders. I shared the hopelessness of a mother whose daughter had been abducted to another province by the child’s father. These experiences taught me that I needed to remember the person at the heart of every case I would take on as a lawyer.  

Can you walk us through your path after law school?

After law school, I articled at the Ministry of the Attorney General – Crown Law Office Criminal Division. I was lucky to work on many diverse files during this time. I worked extensively on a youth murder case, and was the student on the Jarvis case, a landmark judgment on voyeurism and privacy rights. After articling, I decided to study the Advanced LLM in International Criminal Law in Leiden, the Netherlands. I spent an amazing year learning from some of the top scholars in this field and attending hearings at the international tribunals. As I completed my thesis, my current role as a research associate at the IHRP was posted. I applied and was successful. Though I was sad to leave Europe, I knew I had to take such an amazing role. 

You have researched extensively on the Yazidi Genocide. Can you walk us through your findings?

I wrote my LLM thesis under the renowned genocide scholar, William Schabas. I wanted to approach my thesis like a prosecutor, finding evidence to support my belief that a genocide had occurred. Professor Schabas instead required that I argue both for and against the finding of genocide. This was really difficult for me to do. It honestly pained me to put some of the arguments down in writing. However, I know this exercise helped me to become a better lawyer.

Genocide is one of the most difficult crimes to prove. One must prove the actus reus (at least one of the five prohibited acts must have occurred), the general intent to commit that particular act, and the specific intent to destroy a group in whole or in part through that act. Specific intent, though often inferred through the actions of the state/armed group as a whole, must be held by the individual. As with most genocides, there is no doubt that genocidal acts had been committed against the Yazidis. The acts of killing, transporting children away from the group, and inflicting mental and bodily harm through rape and torture, etc., all fell under the Genocide Convention. There was also no doubt that these acts had been committed on purpose, not accidentally. So the issue comes down to whether one could prove that an individual had the specific intent to destroy the Yazidis in whole or in part. 

There is evidence to support a finding of specific intent. ISIS members published magazines outlining why the Yazidis should not exist. They posted videos and made statements claiming they were going to destroy the Yazidis. The sophisticated nature of their attacks and the elaborate structure of the sexual slavery system they imposed suggests that the group as a whole had a genocidal policy. This policy appears to have been supported by the individuals in the group. But, some have argued that the fact that many Yazidis were “allowed” to live if they converted to Islam essentially militated against a finding of the intent to destroy them. Similarly, the women were largely left alive, unlike in the Holocaust and Rwanda. 

Ultimately, the argument boils down to an understanding of what “destruction” entails. Personally, it seems to me that if someone eradicates the very facet of a group’s identity by forcing individuals to either renounce their religion or be killed, then they intend to destroy a religious group in whole or in part. And the choice to keep women enslaved rather than killing them, because the women are worth more alive than dead to the group for sexual or economic reasons, should not preclude a finding of the intent to destroy. But the reality is that jurisprudence has largely (though not completely) adhered to biological and physical considerations of destruction, rather than cultural. And though there is no minimum number of individuals who must be killed to be considered genocide, smaller-scale massacres have typically been labeled as crimes against humanity rather than genocide.  

I was particularly determined to argue that sexual violence was committed with the intent to destroy the group. Rape has been recognized as falling under the acts of genocide. An individual can commit rape with genocidal intent. In many ways, the sexual slavery enacted upon Yazidi women has destroyed the social fabric of the group. Yazidi women might be physically or psychologically unable to procreate. Many have been forced to give birth to children who are considered to be ethnically different from the group. I would argue that these women were separated from Yazidi men and held as sexual slaves in order to prevent births within the Yazidi group, in addition to the clear sexual and economic motives. This not only amounts to intent to commit cultural destruction, but also biological. Unfortunately, it appears that when sexual violence is the primary act perpetuated against a group and killings are secondary, the label of genocide is not used. More than anything, this thesis has demonstrated to me how women are often the forgotten and neglected victims of international crimes. 

There is hope, however, as genocide trials of ISIS members are starting to emerge. I am following the upcoming genocide prosecution in Germany of ISIS member Taha A.-J with bated breath. I am excited that Amal Clooney is one of the lawyers taking this one on (in addition to all of her phenomenal work with our Media Class!)  

Can you tell us a bit about the projects you’re working on with the IHRP (particularly on domestic gender-based violence)?

I am currently working with Human Rights Watch on a global campaign against the shackling of individuals with mental health conditions. I also recently completed written submissions to the United Nations Human Rights Committee on the Elmi file, a deportation case involving a former Crown ward. In the coming months, I will be moving forward with a few initiatives regarding gender-based violence. I have been asked to guest lecture two classes in the Media Freedoms course, taught by my colleague Vincent Wong. I am dedicating one of my courses to examining sexual violence perpetuated against journalists, particularly women. On November 26th, the IHRP hosted an event on Feminist Lawyering. I joined a panel of rockstar female lawyers who have built much of their career addressing sexual and gender-based violence in varying ways. In the winter semester, the IHRP will screen a film that examines the fatal consequences for women when abortions are either deemed illegal or are actively denied due to the personal beliefs of doctors. I am also going to be co-teaching the IHRP clinic course next semester, and I am in the early stages of developing a project on sexual violence and international law. Stay tuned! And join the course! 

What are some skills that you think are important for a successful career in human rights or research work?

I think it is really important to learn the art of self-care. Vicarious trauma is real. I spent months reading about gang rape in war, and found myself feeling angry and stressed all of the time. It took a while to recover from that. If you work in this field, you will read about, see images of, or personally witness the fallout from human cruelty. It’s important to take care of yourself first, because you will not be any help to anyone if you burn out. 

You should also develop your networking skills. This field functions largely on personal support and recommendations, so it is important to foster relationships. You are going to have to hustle a bit more to find work in this field, particularly in Canada. Find strong mentors, and when the opportunity arises, pay their help forward.

Also, learn languages. If you were fortunate enough to grow up around French, maintain it. I cannot stress enough how important it is to know multiple languages.

If you could give any additional advice to U of T students interested in human rights work, what would it be?

My overarching piece of advice is to know yourself. Know your values, your priorities, and the reality of your particular situation. If you are going to work in this field, you should take advice from those who have gone before you, but carefully assess whether you can follow the same path. I found that I had to tailor a lot of advice to my life circumstances. I was told I should absolutely complete unpaid internships. I had to remind myself that some of the people giving me this advice were able to take this path because they did not have the same financial circumstances as me. Some had lived at home during law school. Or had their degrees paid for by their parents. Or went to law school at a time when it did not cost $100,000 to attend. Or who had people who could support them if something ultimately went wrong. I do not have that safety net, and unpaid work is not an option for me. So I had to narrow my options accordingly.

Also, it’s fine if you ultimately want to or have to work in other areas of law. Many people want to work in the human rights field, but for a variety of reasons cannot commit to the insecurity of underpaid, contract work. And that’s okay! Human rights advocacy arises in many areas of the law. You can do fulfilling and meaningful work in many legal or law-adjacent positions, as well as with volunteer work. The main thing is to find work that matters to you, and to find contentment while doing it.