 |
 |
|
|
|
An important principle of liberal democracies is to set limits on what governments can do to their citizens. Sometimes the limits on government are left to self-restraint, but in some countries legislation or protection of citizens' rights is put in place. In this section, you will trace the development of civil rights protection in Canada through to the entrenchment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. You will find links to the full text of the Supreme Court of Canada's decisions on Charter issues. Also included is a set of links to a wide range of civil rights organizations. CIVIL RIGHTSIn Canada the definition and protection of civil rights
began with ordinary statutes that set out a limited range of rights
to which citizens were entitled. Saskatchewan was the first Canadian
province to legislate a human rights code, in 1947.
Parliament passed the Bill of Rights in 1960, as one means of protecting Canadians from government excesses. The federal and provincial legislatures have since passed legislation and set up human rights commissions to extend protection into many private contexts, especially employment. For examples, you can read the B.C. Human Rights Code, the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act or visit the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Quebec has its own provincial Charter of Human Rights that has been given enough weight in the courts to strike down other legislation even though it is an ordinary statute. The key section of this document that gives it this force is section 52, which reads:
THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMSThe entrenchment in 1982 of the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms is probably the most important development
in Canadian law this century.
The full text of all Supreme Court of Canada decisions relating to the Charter of Rights, from 1983 to present, is now available on-line thanks to the Centre de recherche en droit public at the Universite de Montreal. (Note: the titles of the decisions are given in French.) This site will also help you to search the cases to find decisions that contain key words. The Canadian Department of Justice also provides a Digest of the Supreme Court's Charter of Rights decisions, and this site allows you to access brief summaries of the cases by each section of the Charter involved. The Library of Parliament has a useful research paper on the Notwithstanding Clause of the Charter. An on going controversy is whether the courts have become
too powerful under the Charter of Rights. Read the results of a Compas
Poll on Canadian's
attitudes to the power of judges. SELECTED
RIGHTS DECISIONS General Approach and Application
of Charter Operation Dismantle v. The Queen [1985] decided that the Charter applies to the prerogative actions of the Crown. Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration [1985] found that the Charter applies to all within Canada, including illegal immigrants. R. v. Therens [1985] and R. Collins [1987] set up the principles for excluding evidence obtained in contravention to the Charter. R. v. Oakes [1986] set out the guidelines for interpreting s.1 and determining the "reasonable limits" that may be placed on the Charter's rights. See also: Edwards Books [1986]. Dolphin Delivery [1986] determined that the Charter only applies to public bodies and not normally to private relations (unless those relations are governed by law). Fundamental Freedoms
Dolphin Delivery [1986] decided that freedom of association does not include a right for unions to strike. Devine v. Quebec [1988] ruled on the Quebec sign language laws. Irwin Toy v. Quebec [1989] and R. v. Keegstra [1990] gave a very broad reach to what kind of "expression" is protected by the Charter. Electoral Boundaries Reference [1991] decided that "the right to vote" included the right to "effective representation," and so constituencies could only vary in size according to set limits. Osborne v. Canada [1991] struck down the prohibitions against most civil servants engaging in partisan political activities. R. v. Butler [1992] upheld obscenity provisions dealing with pornography. Life, Liberty, and Security
of the Person Legal Rights
R. v. Askov [1990] gave some limits to the "reasonable delay" allowed in bringing a matter to trial. This decision led to thousands of charges being dropped. The Court revisited the issue and gave more flexible guidelines in R. v. Morin [1992]. R. v. Seaboyer [1991] struck down the "rape shield" law that had given some protection of privacy to rape victims in prosecutions of their alleged attackers. R. Daviault [1994] acquitted a person of a brutal sexual assault because he had been extremely intoxicated. R. v. Stillman [1997] placed strong limits on warrantless searches. Equality
McKinney v. University of Guelph [1990] ruled that mandatory retirement was acceptable age discrimination. Egan v. Canada [1995] decided that the Old Age Security Act is not unconstitutional by not including same-sex unions in its definition of spouses. Vriend v. Alberta [1998] declared that the Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act must be read to extend protection against discrimination to cover sexual orientation. M v. H. [1999] ruled that the statutory definition of "spouse" must allow for same-sex couples. Corbiere v. Canada (Min. of Indian & Northern Affairs) [1999] explored the analysis that courts should undertake to determine whether the grounds on which discrimination has occurred constitute "analogous grounds" to those types of prohibited discrimination listed in the Charter. Language Rights
Aboriginal Rights
Delgamuukw v. British Columbia [1997] lays down principles about the nature of Aboriginal title to land, particularly in the absence of a treaty. LINKS TO RIGHTS ISSUES AND ORGANIZATIONS ACLU:
American Civil Liberties Union RELATED LINKSYou can find more information related to constitutional
issues in other sections of Nelson's Canadian Politics on the Web:
|
|
|
Copyright on all contents owned by Nelson. |
|