Abstract This paper discusses the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms (hereafter referred to as the Charter's is part of the Constitution Act, 1982) and is fundamental legislation used by the Canadian courts to protect the human rights of Canadian citizens. The paper discusses how like all legislation, the Charter is complex and may be interpreted in different ways. Over the years, the courts have been charged with attempting to interpret it in the best interests of Canadians.
Abstract This nine page paper argues that the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms is not anti-democratic, for it serves the vital purpose of safeguarding the political, social, economic, and religious rights and liberties of all Canadians, regardless of their ethnic heritage. The paper describes the history of the Charter of Rights and discusses the similarities between it and the Canadian Bill of Rights that existed prior to 1982.
From the Paper "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: An Analysis of Principles The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not anti-democratic, for it serves the vital purpose of safeguarding the political, social, economic, and religious rights and liberties of all Canadians, regardless of their ethnic heritage. Despite the claims of its critics that it is anti-democratic, most of its content is not new or deserving of criticism, for before the Charter was put into effect in 1982, the Canadian Bill of Rights and related laws already protected many of the rights and freedoms that have been incorporated together into the Charter. (McDonald 2-5)"
A discussion on whether judges, who are responsible for interpreting the law under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, should have have restrictions imposed on their interpretive powers.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 0 sources, 2006, $ 26.95
Abstract The CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedom protects important freedoms of all Canadians such as freedom of the press, religion, and expression. However, the implementation of the law, which allows almost unlimited power for judges to interpret the rights as they see fit, is worrying. This paper discusses the needs for limits on judges' interpretive powers.
Abstract This paper analyzes the role of human dignity and individual rights in cases involving the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms. The analysis finds that individual rights were accorded greater weight by the courts in Section 15(1) cases than in Section 7 cases.
Abstract Section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms identifies Canadians' fundamental freedoms of thought and religion. This discussion assesses its application in the last twenty years. The emphasis is on issues of religious observance-'Sunday shopping' and prayer in schools-and the issue of 'hate crimes' such as holocaust denial.
Abstract This paper discusses the CanadianCharter of Human Rights and Freedoms and examines how the strengths and weaknesses of the Charter impact the courts. The paper takes a closer look at the six rights outlined in the Charter such legal, equality, and language rights. Two court cases are examined. These cases represent litigation based on infringements of an individual's rights.
From the Paper "Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms' Impact on Courts Introduction Canada is a democratic country where citizens live freely amongst one another. It is a multicultural nation that prides itself on maintaining and preserving equality among its people. This is not to say that inequalities do not exist, rather that Canada is a nation that is committed to preserving the rights and freedoms of all peoples. However, it is the 21st Century and there are some countries around the world that have not caught on to the human rights and freedoms movement."
Abstract This paper explains that, until 1982, human rights in Canada were protected by the Canadian Bill of Rights. The author points out that the Bill of Rights did not protect women's rights very well, and some court cases had unfair and discriminatory outcomes. The paper relates that, in 1982, the Canadian government passed the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms to protect the human rights of all Canadians in a more effective way.
Abstract This paper explains that Section D33 (S33) of the "CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms" permits Parliament or the provincial legislatures to over-ride some portions of the Charter so that legislation of the kind is automatically subject to an incoming government's review or cancellation. The author points out that S33 is viewed as a brokering mechanism, a kind of bridge between British and American models of constitutional law. The paper relates that S33 stresses the right of the people to demonstrate their opposition to policies produced through the legal process that do not comply with the people's values or preferences. The author remarks that, in this legislation, one sees a Canada grounded in both rights and obligations and the wish for elected representatives to shape development more.
From the Paper "For instance, in the months that gay marriage was debated in Ottawa, there was no progress made on dozens of large Aboriginal land claims in Canada that may prove of greater moral interest to millions of Canadians. The rights and ambitions of a gay Canadian minority within a minority, in gay Canadians wishing to marry and able to afford the costs of a marriage, were placed at the top of the Supreme Court's agenda. This can be seen as merely part of Canada's shift towards a 'constitutional' democracy."
Abstract This paper uses two academic journal articles and one book to examine what role race plays in the Charter and in Canadian society in terms of racial discrimination. The author writes from a historical perspective. The paper includes an outline of how to conduct an article review.
Abstract In this article, the writer deals with the contemporary debate over the legal and social acceptance of homosexual couples. The paper maintains that, from legal perspective, the acceptance of homosexual couples is supported under the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as the case of "M. v. H". The writer concludes that, protected legally under sections 2 and 15 of the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms, homosexuals are legally accepted as part of society; with equal rights as heterosexuals. The writer maintains that, if some find homosexuality to be a problem, they must still realize that homophobia, hate crimes, and overall discrimination is not the solution.
From the Paper "Canada is well known for being a 'tossed salad', rather than a melting pot of cultures like the United States. This is due to its acceptance of different cultures and promotion of cultural diversity. In such a diverse society it is difficult to create laws that are pleasing to all. Pluralism in Canada does not cease at culture alone, but also includes religion and sexual orientation. Homosexuality has become a rising issue in society and should be accepted in the same manner as cultural and religious diversity. Unfortunately, this is not the case. From a social standpoint, homosexuality may be found morally corrupt for those with certain ethical and religious principles. Contrarily, it may be found as a new form of self-expression and freedom for those who wish to condone or practice it. From a legal standpoint, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the freedom of association, as well as the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression."
Tags: gay marriage, M. v. H., CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms
Abstract This paper examines the importance of the Charter of Rights in the Canadian Constitution. The Charter should be viewed as a tribute of a nation that holds certain rights and freedoms as inexorable. This is to advocate the Charter without reservation.
Abstract This paper explores the issue of whether or not the rules of evidence in Canada discriminate against defendants or, conversely, work in their favor. After examining a representative sampling of the available legal record, the writer concludes that - in both civil as well as criminal law - every effort is undertaken to protect defendants from evidence being admitted that might unjustly prejudice them in the eyes of a judge or, more likely, the eyes of a jury. Along the way, the paper looks at how judges have grappled with the challenges posed by new information-collecting technologies as they pertain to the issue of what is, and what is not, an appropriate document as well as what the legal concepts "trustworthiness" and "Best Evidence Rule" really mean - and what their implications are for defendants. From there, the paper proceeds to enter into a discussion of the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms and how it protects defendant prerogatives.
From the Paper "Generally speaking, the admissibility of documents in Canadian courts is more open to interpretation than ever before; for example, by the 1990s there was a growing trend towards trial judges exercising discretionary power with regards to what documents should be ruled admissible in courts and which ones should not be admissible. What should not be overlooked in all of this is that justices are making these determinations at a time when technology is changing the way in which technology is stored dramatically."
Abstract This paper explains that the patriation of the Constitution of Canada in 1982 allowed the Charter of Rights to play an increasingly important role in the Canadian political process, permitting the revision and elimination of many existing laws. The case of Dr. Henry Morgentaler v. the abortion laws of the Crown., the author states, is an example of this situation. The paper then presents a brief outline of the Constitution, the Canada Charter of Rights and the specifics of this case.
From the Paper "The aforementioned case before the nation in which the Charter of Rights has directly affected the Canadian political process within the framework of the Constitution is that of Dr. Henry Morgentaler v. the abortion laws of the Crown. For the past twenty years Dr. Morgentaler has been attempting to operate abortion clinics in various major Canadian cities. His efforts continued until January 29th, 1988 when the Supreme Court of Canada, in a five to two decision, overturned the then present abortion laws."
Abstract This paper argues that Canadian judges wield too much power in our society. The Canadian Supreme Court was supposed to play a role in the process of checks and balances in this democracy. Yet judges are now acting as legislators rather than as referees. The Canadian Supreme Court has especially been armed with much power since the introduction of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982. As a result, a certain "judicialization" of politics has occurred, in the sense that Courts have become too powerful in the political process.
Abstract This paper discusses how a new privacy act instated by the Federal government and recent developments in governmental policies, have potential implications in contradiction of the guarantees set out by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It argues that PIPEDA was brought into effect to appease economic trade more than to protect Canadian citizens and how the right to privacy seems to be compromised by the government's desire for more control, under the guise of "protection" by this new act.
From the Paper "Another scenario being proposed by the Privacy Commissioner would be the inclusion of monitoring of our communications, proposal of national ID cards with biometric identifiers as well as the government support of police video surveillance of public streets. These proposals will allow the government to keep files of personal information for any one of us arbitrarily. All of these proposals directly contravene our rights to privacy as given to us by the Charter, which maintains that "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principals of
fundamental justice". Perhaps Mr. Orwell was correct: Big Brother really is watching us. Our fundamental right to security of person being may be being compromised."
