Equity in Canada

Research Paper # 100610

Canadian Studies
Law > Historic Trials

Equity in Canada

An examination of the controversial R. v. Gladue decision of 1999 and what it portends for Canadian justice.

1,190 words () | 4 sources | MLA | 2008 United States

Paper Summary:

This paper looks at a prominent Canadian Supreme Court case and explores what social issues it raises. In particular, it focuses on the "R. v. Gladue" verdict of 1999. It analyzes the specter that the case raised, that the Court is prepared to put group affiliation ahead of other mitigating or aggravating criteria when assessing the length of time a wrong-doer should spend behind bars. The paper suggests that Canada is moving towards a legal approach that expressly discriminates against some groups while privileging others.

From the Paper:

"Taking into account these articles, it is clear that the Supreme Court's enthusiastic support for 718(2) signals judicial recognition of the idea that treating natives differently than non-natives is somehow acceptable - and if one group can be permitted this indulgence, then why not others? The social implications are that, in the hands of unscrupulous or incompetent jurists, a sort of racial (or gendered) apartheid before the law may take place whereby "historically disadvantaged" groups may find themselves the happy beneficiaries of a legal system that grants them concessions not available to others. While this sort of approach may seem just to some, it essentially means that the courts are no longer color-blind but are, instead, unelected and unaccountable lobbyists for some groups rather than for other groups. The articles therefore shed light on the implicit dangers of traveling down this path and they are persuasive for no other reason than that justice which refuses to treat those who come before the courts equally is scarcely justice at all."

Sample of Sources Used:

Donnelly, Patrick. "Special Treatment for Indians," Alberta Report 10 Nov. 1997: 24-25.
Engen, Rodney L., Randy R. Gainey, Robert D. Crutchfield, Joseph G. Weis, "Discretion and Disparity under Sentencing Guidelines: the Role of Departures and Structured Sentencing Alternatives," Criminology, 41(1), 99-130.
Kramer, John H., and Jeffrey T. Ulmer. "Sentencing Disparity and Departure from Guidelines." Justice Quarterly, 13, 81-106.
R. v. Gladue [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688.