The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of Canada’s written constitution called the Constitution Act in 1982 it was the second main aspect of the Act and it guaranteed fundamental, democratic, legal, egalitarian, and linguistic rights and freedoms against government intrusion, it imposed formal new limitations on the governments in interaction with its citizens. The charter has made society more equitable for visible minorities through its use of its Fundamental Rights and Freedoms and Section 15 which say that every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of law without discrimination, but does the Charter really represent Canada’s egalitarian society or are we just saying we care without actually taking action. In this paper it will be shown that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has not made Canadian society more equitable and will discuss the right side and the left side of the debate, while agreeing with the left sided critiques. The right winged perspective on the Charter argues that the groups are not seeking equality, but, instead, are asking judges to grant them political advantages through favorable Charter decisions ( Smithey, S. I., 2001, p. 2) while the left winged perspective is the Charter not only does not go far enough, but actually retards egalitarian progress in Canada and that the Charter is essentially a classically liberal document designed to constrain state action rather than to require the
In the Charter of Liberties and Privileges, which took effect on October 30th, 1683, Governor Thomas Dongan lists many key advances. The reason for these demands was due to citizens of Long Island refusing to pay taxes levied without their consent. The Charter of Liberties and Privileges asserted people the right to self-government, self-taxation, freedom of worship, trail by jury, and other privileges enjoyed by Englishmen.
In examining the constitutional jurisprudence since 1982, it can be seen that most cases have followed along with Trudeau’s objectives of individual rights protection. However, Trudeau’s article The Value of a Just Society notes that communal rights of Aboriginal communities represent a notable exception. He defends this, mentioning that these collective rights are enshrined where “the rights of individuals may be indistinct and difficult to define.” The Canadian Constitution is uncommon in the fact that it protects cultural rights, such as linguistic and Aboriginal rights. It is important for Canada to protect these rights, as Canada is made up of many different groups of people. It was Trudeau’s desire that the constitution protect everyone equally, “without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.” By assigning rights to the individual rather than to collectives, linguistic
Canada today faces a major challenge when it comes to access to justice. The civil, criminal and family justice system has become very complicated, slow and extremely expensive for majority of Canadians. These issues are particularly glaring to low income earners, people with disabilities and other minorities. Canadian justice system have become incapable of providing solutions that can addressing problems brought to it. With the creation of the Canadian charter of right and freedom, access to justice became more of an equality issue. It moved from simply being the capacity to litigate, to the quality of outcome or outcome focused. While there have been efforts to reform the system, our courts continues to lack institutional structures that can address change and create a more equitable judicial system both in capacity and outcome.
In the Canadian Charters of Rights and Freedoms (1982) under section 11, it is stated that a person that has been charged with a criminal offence, has the right to a trial by jury. For many years jury trials have been under constant criticism in regards to the jury’s inability to adequately perform the responsibilities entrusted to them. Many studies have been performed looking into the jury selection process, jury bias, pre-trial publicity exposure and attitudes/personality of a juror, in order to increase the jury’s abilities to perform their responsibilities to present a fair trial. In the case People v. Weatherton (2014), the inappropriate behaviour of a jury member lead to a legal dispute regarding the final verdict. This behaviour lead to a lengthy investigation with the final decision, made by the Supreme Court of California, to reverse the guilty verdict. As a member of the jury, it is important to understand the responsibilities one must uphold while deciding whether a person is guilty or not guilty.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, implemented in 1982 outlines the rights and freedoms that Canadians have as citizens of this country. In this paper I will ask whether we need such a charter, whether we can trust the interpretation of the Charter by the Supreme Court and how the Charter balances power in a democratic way. I will then contemplate the foundational place morality holds in the lawmaking process. In all of this I argue that to make a good law one must hold to a moral standard and one must act in the understanding that belief, and not objectivity, plays the main role in rational thought.
Discrimination is a big topic it can be blatantly out of discussion but it is important to stress that people of all race, gender and sex, religion or even sexual orientation. In Canada specifically has done some reasonable set of legal protections to prevent Canadians from being discriminated against but sometimes it is not that easy and things turn out of people’s control and will. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section of the Canadian Constitution that makes it illegal for the government of Canada, and the provincial government to pass laws that either plainly discriminate against certain Canadians on the basis of their identity. Place an unfair burden on one group over another. The Supreme Court of Canada routinely overturns laws they perceive to be discriminatory on the grounds of Charter protections. Canada’s legislation called the Canadian Human Rights Act that prevents private entities, such as employers, landlords, schools, and stores from discriminating against clients or customers on the basis of identity. Discrimination cases of these sorts are decided by a government known as the Human Rights Tribunal that has the power to issue fines and or other corrective actions. The various provincial governments have their own human rights laws.
The right to life is considered a fundamental freedom of all citizens in society. For example, in section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter), every Canadian is granted the right to “life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice” . However, this freedom rests on a delicate balance and has been contested in various situations to determine its scope. Originally, the preservation of life was considered as an absolute necessity and was therefore entrenched in Canadian constitutional law. However, recently this necessity has been questioned for its assumption that all individuals desire to live at all costs. Instead, the Courts have recognized that “in certain circumstances, an individual 's choice about the end of [their] life is entitled to respect” . As such, this paper will examine a legal case that exemplifies the changing societal beliefs, and will analyze the specifics of the law, paying close attention to the nature of the legal conflict, policy implications, and its contribution to the understanding of Canadian law.
Firstly, through my observations of the different courts it was evident the administration of justice is done in due time, and the process is not expedited without an outstanding reason as it can lead to misguided verdict. Furthermore, the criminal trial process in our society focuses on equality and promotes this principle by entitling an accused of even the most heinous crimes to civil liberties and processes as not to compromise the criminal trial process. A fair trial is an intrinsic right of all members of society making it fundamental to our being, and is ergo ensured to us all under s.11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms.
Being born in the United States automatically grants you certain rights, such as freedom of speech, religion, and press, unlike being born in another country. Many presidents and people fought to have these basic rights granted to us. One may question why it is important to have freedom of speech and religion, well here is why.
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights granted constitutional status that was introduced in the Constitution Act of 1982 by Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. The Constitution Act is also known as the repatriation of the Canadian Constitution. The Charter had several purposes; the first is “to outline and guarantee the political rights of Canadian citizens, as well as the civil rights of anyone who is residing on the territory of Canada” (The Canadian Charter. 1). Secondly, “It balances the rights of legislatures and courts through the ‘notwithstanding’ clause, which gives the federal and provincial parliaments limited powers to override court decisions “, while section 2 of the bill enshrines the freedom of the press, allowing the media to release controversial reports without fear of the state (Ibbitson. 2012). thirdly, it criminalized discrimination in society, government rulings and the judicial system and provides a set of ethical principles for all Canadians to follow, while promoting equality throughout the country.
The United Bill of Rights is perhaps one of the most important pieces of constitutional legislature that protects the rights of the individual to freedom, liberty, and personal autonomy by limiting the powers of the federal government. While most people and the media discussions surrounding the Bill of Rights usually clusters around the 1st and 2nd Amendments, the 7th Amendment is also an integral component in limiting federal power, which aids in transferring the power of government from the concentrated hands of a few to instead the people. However, the 7th Amendment plays a less significant role in affecting the day to day lives of the average American in today 's time than it did when the Bill of Rights was initially ratified in 1791.
Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau was establishing the renowned Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Since the three decades of being established, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has protected the individual rights and freedoms of thousands of Canadians. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has become a part of the national identity and has become a big patriotic symbol for the country. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the document the truly separates Canada from all the other powerful nations and is really something that Canadian take a pride in. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms brings up many questions, but the biggest and most common question is how effectively does Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms protect your individual rights? To exactly know how effectively it protects your rights you can look at situations where it has protected and has not protected the rights of Canadians. Within the Middle East, the largest population of the men and women are Muslim. The Muslim religion suggests that women wear a veil or hijab, which is a headscarf that only exposes a woman’s eyes, accompanied by a burqa, which is a full body cloak. The sole purpose of the clothing is to cover a woman’s feminine features from men’s eyes. The Quran, an Islamic scripture, supports and slightly obligates the uniform by saying that women are to be conservative, “let them wear their head covering over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments” (Quran). It could be inferred that women
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms entrenched under the CA 1982 act in the Canadian constitution is seen as a decisive indicator of national identity by the majority of Canadians. The charter’s role in Canadian society ranges from providing individuals with intrinsic human rights such as freedom of expression, freedom of belief and acts particularly as a concrete limit on ‘tyranny of the majority’, advocating and enforcing basic rights of individuals and minorities. It is however worthy to note that CA 1982’s involvement as a platform to increased activism of the Supreme court in Canada is highly controversial. Employing the charter as a basis to the interpretation of different situations, the Canadian Supreme Court has in many occasions
The United States Bill of Rights was created in September 25, 1789 and ratified December 15, 1791. The Bill of Rights are the first ten amendments to the Constitution that were established to defend our rights as individuals and as American citizens. The Bill of Rights describes the rights of its people. The first four articles of the amendments deal specifically with the balance of power between the federal government and state government.
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of the Constitution and it was added to the Constitution in 1982. The Constitution has many laws about the essential guidelines one must follow in our country. It also governs how the government/ organizations should treat their citizens. The Charter allows the citizens and newcomers to feel like they are appreciated and also safe. However, there are situations where the Charter cannot protect you. The Charter can be stretched and can be looked at from different perspectives which is why these cases are very controversial. In Canada, we have many levels of courts so if someone was rejected by a lower court, they can appeal to a higher one. Cases that include an individual that feels as if their rights haven’t been respected take months because the appeal to present their case in front of a higher court can take weeks. It is the understanding of the individual that the if he/she brings a case to the court, they will win because courts are equal and unbiased but when that is not always the case. There are many cases when the judge cannot decide because both the challenger and the law are correct. In today’s society, equality issues are ever growing, these cases are brought based on section 15 of the charter that promises Canadians are fair and equal trial regardless of the differences. Decisions are very tough, so they are usually made on the grounds of evidence, statutes and precedent cases.