who signed the charter of rights and freedoms
Queen Elizabeth II of Canada
1181430
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (), in Canada often simply the Charter, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the "Constitution Act, 1982". The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all areas and levels of the government. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17,
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
1181478
rights. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (), in Canada often simply the Charter, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the "Constitution Act, 1982". The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all areas and levels of the government. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
1181430
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (), in Canada often simply the Charter, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the "Constitution Act, 1982". The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all areas and levels of the government. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17,
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
15994871
the Protection and Promotion of Religious Rights and Freedoms" in 2011, 67 religious organisations, including numerous Christian denominations representing approximately 8–10 million South Africans, had signed the charter. After the public endorsement of the charter, the "South African Council for the Protection and Promotion of Religious Rights and Freedoms" was established to oversee the process of the charter being formally enacted into South African law by Parliament. A steering committee convened by Prof Pieter Coertzen was also appointed to prepare a constitution for the Council. The members of the council, some of whom previously served on the "Continuation Committee", are:
South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms
9345222
Section 34 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 34 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the last section of Canada's Charter of Rights, which is entrenched in the "Constitution Act, 1982". Section 34 provides guidance for the legal citation of the "Charter". The section has been interpreted by Canadian writers, who have analyzed both its intention and its meaning. Because the section affirms the name of the "Charter" and thus entrenches it in the "Constitution Act", it came into focus in 1994 when a Member of Parliament (MP) proposed to change the name of
Section 34 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
2320347
by public bodies and the Protection of personal information. Having precedence over all provincial legislation (including the latter), the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms stands at the pinnacle of Quebec's legal system. Only the Constitution of Canada, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, enjoys priority over the Quebec charter. The Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms consists of six parts: The Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms is unique among Canadian (and North American) human rights documents in that it covers not only the fundamental (civil and political) human rights, but also a number of important social
Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms
6871131
that principle. He was supported by a thousand constituents who had signed a petition, but the proposal was controversial and the party leader moved Robinson to the backbenches. The preamble has proved valuable to some groups and political parties. The Christian Heritage Party of Canada, for example, quoted the preamble on the main page of their website, and the party called itself "Canada's only pro-Life, pro-family federal political party, and the only federal party that endorses the principles of the Preamble to the "Charter of Rights and Freedoms"". The words "principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule
Preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6414031
Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 23 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the section of the Constitution of Canada that guarantees minority language educational rights to French-speaking communities outside Quebec, and, to a lesser extent, English-speaking minorities in Quebec. The section may be particularly notable, in that some scholars believe that section 23 "was the only part of the Charter with which Pierre Trudeau was truly concerned." Trudeau was the prime minister who fought for the inclusion of the "Charter of Rights" in the Constitution of Canada in 1982. Section 23(1)(b),
Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
15994874
and the non-religious. The group is concerned that the charter seeks to entrench religion in educational and state institutions using state powers and state funds. The group has drafted and proposed its own "South African Charter of the Freedom from Religion" in opposition to the charter. South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms The South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms (SACRRF) is a charter of rights drawn up by South African religious and civil organisations which is intended to define the religious freedoms, rights and responsibilities of South African citizens. The aim of the drafters of the
South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms
6871132
of law" also appear in the party's official policies regarding what they feel all laws should be based upon, and the party states, "'Human rights' as expressed in the ;"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" can only, therefore, be legitimately interpreted in light of, or in conjunction with, the higher Moral Law of God." Preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the introductory sentence to the Constitution of Canada's Charter of Rights and "Constitution Act, 1982". In full, it reads, Writing in 1982, when the "Charter" came
Preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
9345228
aspires to be a statement by Canadians about the rights and freedoms which we as Canadians deeply value in our democratic society." MacLellan added that section 1 implied a need for responsibilities, so "It is not necessary to change the title of this charter to emphasize the integral relationship between the individual's rights and his or her responsibility to the rest of society." Section 34 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 34 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the last section of Canada's Charter of Rights, which is entrenched in the "Constitution Act, 1982".
Section 34 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5008144
Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 2 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" (""Charter"") is the section of the Constitution of Canada that lists what the "Charter" calls "fundamental freedoms" theoretically applying to everyone in Canada, regardless of whether they are a Canadian citizen, or an individual or corporation. These freedoms can be held against actions of all levels of government and are enforceable by the courts. The fundamental freedoms are freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of belief, freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association. Section 1
Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5849750
to a part of Aboriginal life? (3) would the remedy possibly given by the Charter limit Aboriginal rights? Section 25 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 25 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the first section under the heading "General" in the "Charter", and like other sections within the "General" sphere, it aids in the interpretation of rights elsewhere in the "Charter". While section 25 is also the Charter section that deals most directly with Aboriginal peoples in Canada, it does not create or constitutionalize rights for them. The "Charter" is a part of
Section 25 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5849741
Section 25 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 25 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the first section under the heading "General" in the "Charter", and like other sections within the "General" sphere, it aids in the interpretation of rights elsewhere in the "Charter". While section 25 is also the Charter section that deals most directly with Aboriginal peoples in Canada, it does not create or constitutionalize rights for them. The "Charter" is a part of the larger "Constitution Act, 1982". Aboriginal rights, including treaty rights, receive more direct constitutional protection under section 35
Section 25 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
15994862
South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms The South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms (SACRRF) is a charter of rights drawn up by South African religious and civil organisations which is intended to define the religious freedoms, rights and responsibilities of South African citizens. The aim of the drafters of the charter is for it to be approved by Parliament in terms of section 234 of the Constitution of South Africa. The SACRRF details what the legal and civil manifestations of the right to freedom of religion would be for individuals, groups and official organisations in South
South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms
9345226
and the United States Bill of Rights, saying that those documents were written by men who had just emerged from conflict and still remembered it, and thus Canada could be duller. However, he noted there was some drama in the "Charter" in that it was written when there was a threat of Quebec separatism, and section 27 (multiculturalism), section 25 (Aboriginal rights), and section 15(2) (affirmative action) of the "Charter" could change the country. In 1994, the House of Commons of Canada debated changing the name of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" to the "Canadian Charter of Rights,
Section 34 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7101801
25 refers to Aboriginal rights and section 26 refers to other rights not in the "Charter", although unlike section 21 these sections recognize rights outside the Constitution. Section 21 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 21 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of several sections of the "Charter" relating to the official languages of Canada. The official languages, under section 16 of the "Charter", are English and French. Sections 16 to 20 guarantee a number of rights in regard to the use of these languages in the federal and New Brunswick courts and
Section 21 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
1181467
text. For example, a right to legal aid has been read into section 10 of the Charter (the right to counsel), but the Covenant explicitly guarantees the accused need not pay "if he does not have sufficient means." The Canadian Charter has little to say, explicitly at least, about economic and social rights. On this point, it stands in marked contrast with the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. There are some who feel economic rights ought to be read into section 7 rights to security of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5130733
write, "section 10(b) of the Charter overrules "Hogan"." In "R. v. Bartle" (1994) the Supreme Court ruled that rights to be informed that one may seek counsel included rights to be told of duty counsel and how to obtain it (e.g., through a free telephone call). Section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms specifies rights upon arrest or detention, including the rights to consult a lawyer and the right to "habeas corpus". As a part of a broader range of legal rights guaranteed by the Charter, section
Section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
2320352
Youth Rights Commission. The commission will investigate the matter and attempt to foster a settlement between the parties. It may recommend corrective measures. If those are not followed, the commission may introduce litigation before a court (usually, but not necessarily, the Human Rights Tribunal). Victims will be represented free of charge by the commission. The Quebec charter does not apply to federally regulated activities in Quebec. Those are subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and/or the Canadian Human Rights Act. Notable cases decided under the Charter include: Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms The Charter of
Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms
7564544
Section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 29 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the section of "Charter" that most specifically addresses rights regarding denominational schools and separate schools. Section 29 is not the source of these rights but instead reaffirms the pre-existing special rights belonging to Roman Catholics and Protestants, despite freedom of religion and religious equality under sections 2 and 15 of the "Charter". Such rights may include financial support from the provincial governments. In the case "Mahe v. Alberta" (1990), the Supreme Court of Canada also had to reconcile denominational
Section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7564550
religious teachings could be provided in French. Section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 29 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the section of "Charter" that most specifically addresses rights regarding denominational schools and separate schools. Section 29 is not the source of these rights but instead reaffirms the pre-existing special rights belonging to Roman Catholics and Protestants, despite freedom of religion and religious equality under sections 2 and 15 of the "Charter". Such rights may include financial support from the provincial governments. In the case "Mahe v. Alberta" (1990), the Supreme Court
Section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7101797
Section 21 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 21 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of several sections of the "Charter" relating to the official languages of Canada. The official languages, under section 16 of the "Charter", are English and French. Sections 16 to 20 guarantee a number of rights in regard to the use of these languages in the federal and New Brunswick courts and other government institutions. Thus, section 21 clarifies that language rights regarding English and French in the Constitution of Canada, outside the "Charter", remain valid and are not
Section 21 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
2320346
Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms The Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms () is a statutory bill of rights and human rights code passed by the National Assembly of Quebec on June 27, 1975. It received Royal Assent from Lieutenant Governor Hugues Lapointe, coming into effect on June 28, 1976. Introduced by the Liberal government of Robert Bourassa, the charter followed extensive preparatory work that began under the Union Nationale government of Daniel Johnson. The charter ranks among other quasi-constitutional Quebec laws, such as the Charter of the French Language and the Act respecting Access to documents held
Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms
5750609
well as a stronger section regarding the Charter and aboriginal rights, section 25, were added to the Constitution of Canada instead. Section 26 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 26 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, like other provisions within the section 25 to 31 bloc, provides a guide in interpreting how the Charter should affect Canadian society. The section's particular role is to address rights not covered by or mentioned in the Charter. The section reads: As constitutional scholar Peter Hogg notes, this section is analogous to the Ninth Amendment to the United States
Section 26 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5750603
Section 26 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 26 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, like other provisions within the section 25 to 31 bloc, provides a guide in interpreting how the Charter should affect Canadian society. The section's particular role is to address rights not covered by or mentioned in the Charter. The section reads: As constitutional scholar Peter Hogg notes, this section is analogous to the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, In other words, section 26 confirms that rights "not within" the Charter are nevertheless as real as they
Section 26 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
4730708
However, Morton and Knopff's source is "anonymous". Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 1 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the section that confirms that the rights listed in the Charter are "guaranteed". The section is also known as the reasonable limits clause or limitations clause, as it legally allows the government to limit an individual's "Charter" rights. This limitation on rights has been used in the last twenty years to prevent a variety of objectionable conduct such as hate speech (e.g., in "R v Keegstra") and obscenity (e.g., in "R v
Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
4730684
Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 1 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the section that confirms that the rights listed in the Charter are "guaranteed". The section is also known as the reasonable limits clause or limitations clause, as it legally allows the government to limit an individual's "Charter" rights. This limitation on rights has been used in the last twenty years to prevent a variety of objectionable conduct such as hate speech (e.g., in "R v Keegstra") and obscenity (e.g., in "R v Butler"). When the government has limited an
Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
4748733
provincial governments, including that of Prince Edward Island, as well as the New Democratic Party, opposed the change. The NDP thought that if property rights were enshrined in the Charter, other economic rights should be added. In September 1982, after the Charter had been enacted, the government of British Columbia approved of an unsuccessful amendment to section 7 that would protect property rights. "See Unsuccessful attempts to amend the Canadian Constitution for more information. Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 7 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is a constitutional provision that protects
Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6108930
Section 13 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 13 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section of the Charter which, along with section 11 (c), specifies rights regarding self-incrimination. It reads: Rights against self-incrimination had existed in Canadian law even before the Charter, but these applied to cases in which an individual might incriminate him or herself while giving testimony in another person's trial. Since the enactment of the Charter, the right has been extended in case law in regard to retrials, to exclude from one's retrial self-incriminating evidence if it had been
Section 13 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
1181440
of the Act, may be collectively referred to as the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms". Many of the rights and freedoms that are protected under the Charter, including the rights to freedom of speech, habeas corpus and the presumption of innocence, have their roots in a set of Canadian laws and legal precedents sometimes known as the Implied Bill of Rights. Many of these rights were also included in the Canadian Bill of Rights, which the Canadian Parliament enacted in 1960. However, the Canadian Bill of Rights had a number of shortcomings. Unlike the Charter, it was an ordinary
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5750608
rights, legislatures still can. Thus s. 26 is a much weaker defence of rights than the superficially similar protection of unenumerated rights in the American Bill of Rights. The content of section 26 first appeared in the October 1980 draft of the Charter (the earliest version), but also stated the Charter should not be construed as denying the existence of "any rights or freedoms that pertain to the native peoples of Canada." After dramatic protests by Native Canadians, who felt this clause did not sufficiently protect aboriginal rights, it was abandoned and section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, as
Section 26 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5107918
Section 24 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 24 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" provides for remedies available to those whose "Charter" rights are shown to be violated. Some scholars have argued that it was actually section 24 that ensured that the "Charter" would not have the primary flaw of the 1960 "Canadian Bill of Rights": Namely, Canadian judges would be reassured that they could indeed strike down statutes on the basis that they contradicted a bill of rights. Under the heading "Enforcement," the section states: Subsection 24(1) must be distinguished from subsection 52(1)
Section 24 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6289530
should together indicate such rights exist in the territories. The courts dismissed the argument since a literal reading of section 20 shows it bounds only the federal government (and New Brunswick), not the territorial governments. Section 30 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 30 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section that, like other provisions within the section 25 to section 31 block, provides a guide as to how Charter rights should be interpreted and applied by Canadian courts. Section 30's particular role is to address how the Charter applies in the territories
Section 30 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7953541
Section 14 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 14 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the last section under the "Legal rights" heading in the "Charter". It provides anyone in a court the right to an interpreter if the person does not speak the language being used or is deaf. The section states: Before the "Charter" was enacted in 1982, the right to an interpreter in a trial existed under the common law, because it was believed to be necessary for natural justice. The right was incorporated into the "Canadian Bill of Rights" in
Section 14 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6501775
Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section of the Charter that, as part of a range of provisions within the section 25 to section 31 bloc, helps determine how rights in other sections of the Charter should be interpreted and applied by the courts. It is believed that section 27 "officially recognized" a Canadian value, namely multiculturalism. The section reads, When the Charter was enacted in 1982, constitutional scholar Peter Hogg observed that this section did not actually contain a right; namely, it did
Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6492425
Section 31 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 31 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a part of the Constitution of Canada, which clarifies that the Charter does not increase the powers of either the federal government or the legislatures of the provinces of Canada. As a result, only the courts may enforce the rights in the Charter. The section reads, As the government of Canada notes, this shows the Charter does not disturb the balance of the distribution of legislative powers under the Constitution Act, 1867. Constitutional scholar Peter Hogg has called section
Section 31 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6871120
Preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the introductory sentence to the Constitution of Canada's Charter of Rights and "Constitution Act, 1982". In full, it reads, Writing in 1982, when the "Charter" came into force, constitutional scholar Peter Hogg noted that these words, being a preamble, could not really be applied by the courts but in theory could help to determine how other sections of the "Charter" should be read and applied. In this particular case, however, Hogg expressed doubt as to how much help this preamble
Preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5130727
Section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms specifies rights upon arrest or detention, including the rights to consult a lawyer and the right to "habeas corpus". As a part of a broader range of legal rights guaranteed by the Charter, section 10 rights may be limited by the Oakes test and/or the notwithstanding clause. However, section 10 has also spawned considerable litigation, and has made an impact in numerous cases. The section reads: Section 10 is only triggered if a person is arrested or detained. In R
Section 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5800444
Section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 6 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the section of the Canadian Constitution that protects the mobility rights of Canadian citizens, and to a lesser extent that of permanent residents. By mobility rights, the section refers to the individual practice of entering and exiting Canada, and moving within its boundaries. The section is subject to the section 1 Oakes test, but cannot be nullified by the notwithstanding clause. Along with the language rights in the "Charter" (sections 16–23), section 6 was meant to protect Canadian unity.
Section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
4748708
Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 7 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is a constitutional provision that protects an individual's autonomy and personal legal rights from actions of the government in Canada. There are three types of protection within the section: the right to life, liberty and security of the person. Denials of these rights are constitutional only if the denials do not breach what is referred to as fundamental justice. This "Charter" provision provides both substantive and procedural rights. It has broad application beyond merely protecting due process in administrative proceedings
Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7914299
Section 19 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 19 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of the provisions of the Constitution of Canada that addresses rights relating to Canada's two official languages, English and French. Like section 133 of the "Constitution Act, 1867", section 19 allows anyone to speak English or French in federal courts. However, only section 133 extends these rights to Quebec courts, while section 19 extends these rights to courts in New Brunswick. New Brunswick is the only officially bilingual province under section 16 of the "Charter". Section 19 reads,
Section 19 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6567107
mandatory under section 133, since there is no guarantee everyone will be able to understand an MP when he or she chooses to speak in English or French. These rights are thus negative rights only. An unconstitutional action would be for Parliament or a legislature to force a person to leave for speaking in English or French. Section 17 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 17 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of the provisions of the "Charter" that addresses rights relating to Canada's two official languages, English and French. While the section
Section 17 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6517168
"relevant" to this debate, and that this section stated that the other Charter rights could not diminish rights regarding Inuktitut. Senator Serge Joyal, in expressing concern that "12 Aboriginal languages will have disappeared" in the year 2020 "because people are not using them," argued that section 22 provided "a foundation in the Constitution" for a "principle" that could be invoked to guard against this. This senator argued that aboriginal languages, by custom, should have rights as to their usage. Section 22 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 22 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is
Section 22 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7935056
Section 18 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 18 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of the provisions of the Constitution that addresses rights relating to Canada's two official languages, English and French. Like section 133 of the "Constitution Act, 1867", section 18 requires that all statutes and other records made by the Parliament of Canada must be available in both official languages. Section 133 places a similar obligation on the legislature of Quebec, and this is reaffirmed by section 21 of the "Charter". Section 18 of the "Charter" places a similar obligation
Section 18 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7954283
under investigation." This test was upheld and expanded upon by the Supreme Court of Canada in "R. v. Mann". In "Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)", the Supreme Court ruled that the Canada's security certificate regime, which enabled the pretrial detention of those suspected of posing a threat to national security, constituted arbitrary detention within the meaning of Section 9 of the "Charter". Section 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 9 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms", found under the "Legal rights" heading in the Charter, guarantees the right against arbitrary detainment and imprisonment.
Section 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
1134074
Human Rights and Responsibilities" fulfils a similar purpose. Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 33 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is part of the Constitution of Canada. It is commonly known as the notwithstanding clause (or in French), or as the override power, and it allows Parliament or provincial legislatures to override certain portions of the "Charter. The section states: The Parliament of Canada, a provincial legislature or a territorial legislature may declare that one of its laws or part of a law applies temporarily ("notwithstanding") countermanding sections of the "Charter", thereby
Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
13605587
to the hate propaganda offences in the "Criminal Code", and has also rejected challenges to the hate publication provisions in human rights legislation. The Court has ruled that while the provisions restrict freedom of expression, the restrictions are justifiable under section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is part of the Constitution of Canada. Section 2 of the Charter protects freedom of expression, including freedom of the press, and also freedom of religion. Section 1 of the Charter guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in the Charter, but also
Hate speech laws in Canada
6289523
Section 30 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 30 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section that, like other provisions within the section 25 to section 31 block, provides a guide as to how Charter rights should be interpreted and applied by Canadian courts. Section 30's particular role is to address how the Charter applies in the territories of Canada. In 1982, when section 30 first became law, these were the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory. The Yukon Territory has since been renamed Yukon, and Nunavut was created from the eastern Northwest
Section 30 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6567101
Section 17 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 17 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of the provisions of the "Charter" that addresses rights relating to Canada's two official languages, English and French. While the section 17 right to use either language within the Parliament of Canada repeats a right already anchored in section 133 of the "Constitution Act, 1867", section 17 also guarantees the right to use both languages in the legislature of New Brunswick, the only officially bilingual province under section 16 of the "Charter". Section 17 reads, As noted in
Section 17 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5800460
work, which includes the right of everyone to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts." In "United States of America v. Cotroni", the Court wrote that "the International Covenant on Political Rights, Article 12... contains no right to remain in one's own country, although it contains all the other rights listed in ss. 6(1) and 6(2)(a) of the Charter." Section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 6 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the section of the Canadian Constitution that protects the mobility rights of Canadian
Section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6517162
Section 22 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 22 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of several sections of the "Charter" relating to the official languages of Canada. The official languages, under section 16, are English and French. Section 22 is specifically concerned with political rights relating to languages besides English and French. It reads, Section 22 ensures that political rights regarding the use of other languages besides English and French are not limited by the fact that English and French are the only languages recognized as being official by the other provisions
Section 22 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5725813
Section 28 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 28 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a part of the Constitution of Canada. It does not contain a right so much as it provides a guide as to how to "interpret" rights in the Charter. Specifically, section 28 addresses concerns of sexual equality, and is analogous to (and was modelled after) the proposed Equal Rights Amendment in the United States. The section reads: Section 28 is not so much a right because it does not state that men and women are equal; this is done
Section 28 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
1134053
Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 33 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is part of the Constitution of Canada. It is commonly known as the notwithstanding clause (or in French), or as the override power, and it allows Parliament or provincial legislatures to override certain portions of the "Charter. The section states: The Parliament of Canada, a provincial legislature or a territorial legislature may declare that one of its laws or part of a law applies temporarily ("notwithstanding") countermanding sections of the "Charter", thereby nullifying any judicial review by overriding the "Charter"
Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6492431
it had lost under the Charter, by invoking the notwithstanding clause. In 2001, the Federal Court decided against claims that section 30 of the Charter should mean territories should be treated generally like provinces. The Court pointed to section 31, saying section 30 cannot increase the powers of the territorial legislature to the extent that a territory can achieve equality with the provinces. Section 31 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 31 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a part of the Constitution of Canada, which clarifies that the Charter does not increase the
Section 31 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
4941200
Section 32 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 32 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms concerns the application and scope of the Charter. Only claims based on the type of law contemplated by this section can be brought before a court. Section 32(1) describes the basis on which all rights can be enforced. Section 32(2) was added in order to delay the enforcement of section 15 until government was given time to amend their laws to conform to the section. Under the heading "Application of Charter" the section states: The purpose of this section is
Section 32 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
11577027
guaranteed in the Canadian Constitution. After Prime Minister Trudeau announced plans to patriate the constitution in 1980 and attach to it a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, aboriginal groups across Canada fought to include the rights in the Charter. The IAA organized a demonstration on the Alberta Legislature grounds of over 6000 Indians from throughout Alberta. The new Charter recognized only "existing" aboriginal and treaty rights but provided for the negotiation of these rights by means of an amending formula. Successive constitutional conferences failed to clarify these rights, including the Meech Lake Accord, signed in 1987. The IAA and other
Indian Association of Alberta
4765920
Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms contains guaranteed equality rights. As part of the Constitution, the section prohibits certain forms of discrimination perpetrated by the governments of Canada with the exception of ameliorative programs (affirmative action) and rights or privileges guaranteed by or under the Constitution of Canada in respect of denominational, separate or dissentient schools (religious education). Rights under section 15 include racial equality, sexual equality, mental disability, and physical disability. In its jurisprudence, it has also been a source of gay rights in Canada.
Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6496306
Section 5 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 5 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a part of the Constitution of Canada, and the last of three democratic rights in the Charter. Its role is to establish a rule regarding how frequently the Parliament of Canada and the legislatures of the provinces and territories of Canada must meet. This section is thus meant to reflect and constitutionally guarantee a "basic democratic principle" that "a government must explain its actions to the people." The section reads, Section 5 guarantees that, since Parliament and each legislature
Section 5 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7935062
was noted that municipalities exist under the authority of the provincial governments, which are bound by the "Charter" under section 32. (A related case later went to the Supreme Court as "Charlebois v. Saint John (City)".) Section 18 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 18 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of the provisions of the Constitution that addresses rights relating to Canada's two official languages, English and French. Like section 133 of the "Constitution Act, 1867", section 18 requires that all statutes and other records made by the Parliament of Canada must
Section 18 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7954279
Section 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 9 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms", found under the "Legal rights" heading in the Charter, guarantees the right against arbitrary detainment and imprisonment. Section nine states: Detainment within the meaning of both section nine and section ten is not invoked unless there is significant physical or psychological restraint. Detainment can be found to be arbitrary where there is "no express or implied criteria which govern its exercise." The Supreme Court of Canada has stated that "detention" refers to a suspension of an individual's liberty interest by
Section 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7476271
Although municipalities are not mentioned by section 4, they are under the control of the provinces, which are bound by section 4. However, the court refused to accept that just because the municipal council was under the control of the legislative assembly, it could be considered a legislative assembly itself and was thus bound by section 4. The municipal council would rather be a creation of the legislature. Section 4 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 4 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of three democratic rights sections in the Charter. Section 4
Section 4 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7953545
to be fulfilled and carries the burden of proof that he or she actually does not understand the court's language. The court itself is also responsible for satisfying the right, and sometimes a section 14 request does not have to be made by a defendant in order for an interpreter to be provided under section 14. Section 14 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 14 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the last section under the "Legal rights" heading in the "Charter". It provides anyone in a court the right to an interpreter if
Section 14 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5008145
of the "Charter" permits Parliament or the provincial legislatures to enact laws that place certain kinds of limited restrictions on the freedoms listed under section 2. Additionally, these freedoms can be temporarily invalidated by section 33, the "notwithstanding clause", of the "Charter". As a part of the "Charter" and of the larger "Constitution Act, 1982", section 2 took legal effect on April 17, 1982. However, many of its rights have roots in Canada in the 1960 "Canadian Bill of Rights" (although this law was of limited effectiveness), and in traditions under a theorized Implied Bill of Rights. Many of these
Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6501782
any inequality between how cultural groups are funded. In various cases, courts have refused to use section 27 (or section 25) to give First Nations a right to have a certain number of seats on a jury in a trial. Section 27 is referenced by the Canadian Multiculturalism Act, legislation enacted in 1988. Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section of the Charter that, as part of a range of provisions within the section 25 to section 31 bloc, helps determine how rights in
Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
4941204
prevent the government from outsourcing services to private organizations in order to get around the "control test". For example, in "Eldridge v. British Columbia", the Court found that though hospitals are not considered government actors, they are often subject to Charter scrutiny as many government policies are designed to be carried out by the hospitals. Section 32 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 32 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms concerns the application and scope of the Charter. Only claims based on the type of law contemplated by this section can be brought before a
Section 32 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
1181436
provincial governments. The rights and freedoms enshrined in 34 sections of the Charter include: Precluding all the freedoms and forming the basis of the Charter, the very first section, known as "limitations clause", allows governments to justify certain infringements of Charter rights. Every case in which a court discovers a violation of the Charter would therefore require a section 1 analysis to determine if the law can still be upheld. Infringements are upheld if the purpose for the government action is to achieve what would be recognized as an urgent or important objective in a free society, and if the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6798848
was very controversial and would prove influential in the drafting of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the successor of the Canadian Bill of Rights. Indeed, the Supreme Court's narrow and restrained interpretations of the "Canadian Bill of Rights" in cases like "Lavell" certainly reinforced the push for an entrenched bill of rights, like the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms". Section 15 of the October 1980 draft version of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" guaranteed that 15. (1) Everyone has the right to equality before the law and to the equal protection of the law without
Canada (AG) v Lavell
4765936
providing $5 million annually to restore the Court Challenges Program. Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms contains guaranteed equality rights. As part of the Constitution, the section prohibits certain forms of discrimination perpetrated by the governments of Canada with the exception of ameliorative programs (affirmative action) and rights or privileges guaranteed by or under the Constitution of Canada in respect of denominational, separate or dissentient schools (religious education). Rights under section 15 include racial equality, sexual equality, mental disability, and physical disability. In its jurisprudence, it
Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6506789
Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the section of the Canadian Constitution that protects a person's legal rights in criminal and penal matters. This includes both criminal as well as regulatory offences, as it provides rights for those accused by the state for public offences. There are nine enumerated rights protected in section 11. Section 11(a) provides that The right of a person charged with an offence to be informed of the offence originated in section 510 of the "Criminal Code" as well as legal
Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5534044
are parallel service providers, and therefore as an essential component of the collective rights of Ottawa's Franco-Ontarian population. The Government of Ontario criticized the decision as judicial activism, and charged that "The divisional court decision has effectively rewritten the constitution to make [Section] 16.1 applicable to Ontario despite the express intention that it apply to New Brunswick alone." Section 16.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 16.1 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the newest section of the Charter. It was enacted by the Constitution Amendment, 1993 (New Brunswick) and guarantees equality between English-speaking
Section 16.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7476265
Section 4 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 4 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of three democratic rights sections in the Charter. Section 4 guarantees that federal and provincial elections must take place from time to time. Subsection 4(1) provides that the maximum term of the House of Commons, and of all the provincial legislative assemblies, is five years. Under subsection 4(2), an exception is made if war or rebellion causes two-thirds of the membership to believe a House of Commons or legislature should last longer. The section reads, Section 4, with
Section 4 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5130741
has argued that it is the elected governments and "political compromise", rather than the courts, that will mostly advance language rights. Justice Wilson added that subsection 16(3) demonstrates that while language rights need to be improved, they should not be eroded once they have been established. Section 16 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 16 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the first of several sections of the Constitution dealing with Canada's two official languages, English and French. Section 16 declares that English and French are the official languages of Canada and of the
Section 16 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6233678
Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides everyone in Canada with protection against unreasonable search and seizure. This right provides Canadians with their primary source of constitutionally enforced privacy rights against unreasonable intrusion from the state. Typically, this protects personal information that can be obtained through searching someone in pat-down, entering someone's property or surveillance. Under the heading of legal rights, section 8 states: Any property found or seized by means of a violation of section 8 can be excluded as evidence in a trial under
Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
11630591
more and different rights than in United States constitutional law, which by contrast recognizes and protects natural rights rather than grant legal entitlement. Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms The Charter of Fundamental Rights and Basic Freedoms (, ) is a document enacted in 1991 by the Czechoslovak Federative Republic, and continued as part of the constitutional systems of both the Czech Republic and Slovak Republic. In the Czech Republic, the document was kept in its entirety in its 1991 form as a separate document from the constitution, but imbued with the same legal standing as the constitution. By contrast,
Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms
5130709
Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 3 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is a section that constitutionally guarantees Canadian citizens the democratic right to vote in a general federal or provincial election and the right to be eligible for membership in the House of Commons or of a provincial legislative assembly, subject to the requirements of Section 1 of the Charter. Federal judges, prisoners and those in mental institutions have gained the franchise as a result of this provision, whereas the restriction on minors voting was found to be permissible due to
Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5130716
do governments have to commit themselves to the result of a referendum. Thus, how a referendum is administered is within governmental discretion. Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 3 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is a section that constitutionally guarantees Canadian citizens the democratic right to vote in a general federal or provincial election and the right to be eligible for membership in the House of Commons or of a provincial legislative assembly, subject to the requirements of Section 1 of the Charter. Federal judges, prisoners and those in mental institutions have
Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
2267234
Court of Canada disagreed with the discrimination-based-on-ancestry argument under the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms in "Gosselin (Tutor of) v. Quebec (Attorney General)", believing that it conflicted with section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The criteria used by Quebec to determine if parents are entitled to have their children instructed in English are the same as those found under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The 2001 report of the Estates-General on the Situation and Future of the French Language in Quebec identified the negative perception of Quebec's language policy
Charter of the French Language
1029767
they will perform a review of the way these types of complaints are handled. Originally, the Charter of the French Language (Bill 101) required that all commercial signage be in French and no other language. In 1988 "Ford v. Quebec" the Supreme Court of Canada ruled this was against the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. After massive protests in support of the legislation, the Bourassa Government invoked section Thirty-three of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the notwithstanding clause), allowing the language laws to override the rights and freedoms charter for a period of five years, after which
Office québécois de la langue française
11630589
Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms The Charter of Fundamental Rights and Basic Freedoms (, ) is a document enacted in 1991 by the Czechoslovak Federative Republic, and continued as part of the constitutional systems of both the Czech Republic and Slovak Republic. In the Czech Republic, the document was kept in its entirety in its 1991 form as a separate document from the constitution, but imbued with the same legal standing as the constitution. By contrast, the basic provisions of the Charter were integrated directly into the Slovak constitution. Though these legal provisions articles are substantively the same, there
Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms
6108931
obtained during cross examination in the last trial. This section serves a similar purpose as the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, but does not provide witnesses the same opportunity to excuse themselves from testifying. In "R. v. Nedelcu", 2012 SCC 59, a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada found that the prosecution in a criminal trial could use prior inconsistent testimony from a civil trial to impeach an accused person's credibility. Section 13 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 13 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section of the Charter
Section 13 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6414045
the basis upon which French language (minority) instruction rights are respected. Minority language instruction in Manitoba is in transition and still presents various legal issues and related constitutionally charged questions (see Manitoba Act 1870, Louis Riel, Manitoba Schools Question, Laurier-Greenway Compromise). Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 23 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the section of the Constitution of Canada that guarantees minority language educational rights to French-speaking communities outside Quebec, and, to a lesser extent, English-speaking minorities in Quebec. The section may be particularly notable, in that some scholars believe
Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7649101
Section 20 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 20 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of the sections of the Constitution of Canada dealing with Canada's two official languages, English and French. Along with section 16, section 20 is one of the few sections under the title "Official Languages of Canada" that guarantees bilingualism outside Parliament, legislatures and courts. This also makes it more extensive than language rights in the "Constitution Act, 1867". Section 20's specific function is to establish a right to English and French services from the governments of Canada and
Section 20 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5130734
Section 16 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 16 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the first of several sections of the Constitution dealing with Canada's two official languages, English and French. Section 16 declares that English and French are the official languages of Canada and of the province of New Brunswick. Under the heading "Official Languages of Canada", the section reads: This section sets out general principles that are expanded in sections 16.1 to 22. Section 16 itself expands upon language rights in the "Constitution Act, 1867"; whereas section 133 of the "Constitution
Section 16 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7649107
20. Section 20 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 20 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is one of the sections of the Constitution of Canada dealing with Canada's two official languages, English and French. Along with section 16, section 20 is one of the few sections under the title "Official Languages of Canada" that guarantees bilingualism outside Parliament, legislatures and courts. This also makes it more extensive than language rights in the "Constitution Act, 1867". Section 20's specific function is to establish a right to English and French services from the governments of Canada
Section 20 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6738556
goes back to "R. v. Smith", in which Justice Lamer said that "some punishments or treatments will always be grossly disproportionate and will always outrage our standards of decency: for example, the infliction of corporal punishment." In addition to violating section 12, in "Suresh" it was found that torture violates rights to liberty and security of person under section 7, and shocks the conscience. Therefore, Canada may not extradite people to countries where they may face torture. Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as part of
Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
6738548
Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as part of the Constitution of Canada, is a legal rights section that protects an individual's freedom from cruel and unusual punishments in Canada. The section has generated some case law, including the essential case "R. v. Smith" (1987), in which it was partially defined, and "R. v. Latimer" (2001), a famous case in which Saskatchewan farmer Robert Latimer protested that his long, mandatory minimum sentence for the murder of his disabled daughter was cruel and unusual. The section states:
Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
4654682
communicate in English and French with any central government office or with regional offices where there is "a significant demand for communication with and services from that office". Significant demand is not defined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. One of the purposes of the "Official Languages Act" of 1988 was to remedy this omission. The "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" includes similar constitutional obligations making New Brunswick the only officially bilingual province in Canada. Section 21 ensured that the new Charter of Rights and Freedoms would be read as supplementing, rather than replacing any rights of the English
Official bilingualism in Canada
6233685
Dyment" (1988), the Court defined it simply as the "taking of a thing from a person by a public authority without that person's consent." This meaning has been narrowed to cover property taken in furtherance of administration or criminal investigation ("Quebec (Attorney General) v. Laroche", [2002]). Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides everyone in Canada with protection against unreasonable search and seizure. This right provides Canadians with their primary source of constitutionally enforced privacy rights against unreasonable intrusion from the state. Typically, this protects personal
Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
2320350
unless such act expressly states that it applies despite the charter. A total impossibility to adopt derogating laws could be considered incompatible with parliamentary sovereignty, a fundamental principle in political systems following the British tradition; however, Canada, of which Quebec is a province, has a tradition of constitutional supremacy. Its Constitution, which includes the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is supreme, binding the federal parliament and the legislative assemblies of Canada's provinces and territories. The Quebec charter's supremacy under its section 52 applies to the following categories of rights: fundamental rights and freedoms (the right to life, free speech,
Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms
5725818
ensure that Aboriginal and treaty rights be guaranteed equally to Aboriginal men and women. On the one hand, section 28 might be seen as ensuring only rights guaranteed by the Charter are held equally by men and women. In this case section 28 is inapplicable to Aboriginal rights, since Aboriginal rights are protected by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 rather than the Charter (which constitutes sections 1-34 of the Constitution Act, 1982). However, while the Charter does not guarantee Aboriginal rights, section 25 does mention Aboriginal rights. The wording of section 28 mentions "the rights and freedoms referred
Section 28 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5534035
Section 16.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 16.1 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" is the newest section of the Charter. It was enacted by the Constitution Amendment, 1993 (New Brunswick) and guarantees equality between English-speaking and French-speaking New Brunswickers. Section 16.1 (pronounced "sixteen point one") is not to be confused with subsection 16(1) ("sixteen one"), which is part of section 16 and goes back to 1982. Section 16.1 is a separate section; the "point one" numbering simply indicates that at some time (i.e. in 1993) an amendment inserted this new section between two
Section 16.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5725819
to" by the Charter, not "rights and freedoms guaranteed" by the Charter. Since Aboriginal rights are referred to by section 25, section 28 may be applicable. While section 25 states that Aboriginal rights should not be limited by the Charter, this may be trumped by section 28's opening words, "Notwithstanding anything in this Charter..." In 1983, section 35 was amended to add a clause similar to section 28. It states that "Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons." Thus, for consistency it
Section 28 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
7399865
on the issue of the person's mental state. Subsequent hearings do not cannot change that fact. Since the detention is automatic with no standards or criteria that can be applied, the majority found that the law was arbitrarily detaining individuals, and violated section nine of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms". The majority went on to find that the legislation failed the "Oakes" test for a justified limitation of the "Charter" under section one of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms". Specifically, although all the parties agreed that the objective was substantial (detaining individuals who may be dangerous
R v Swain
2494367
civil and human rights. It denied oppositional intent and based its defense of rights on legally binding international documents signed by the Czechoslovak government and on guarantees of civil rights contained in the Czechoslovak Constitution. The Charter 77 group declared its objectives to be the following: to draw attention to individual cases of human rights infringements; to suggest remedies; to make general proposals to strengthen rights and freedoms and the mechanisms designed to protect them; and to act as intermediary in situations of conflict. The Charter had over 800 signatures by the end of 1977, including workers and youth; by
History of Czechoslovakia (1948–89)
1134073
of Rights". A primary difference is that the "Bill of Rights" notwithstanding clause could be used to invalidate "any" right, not just specified clauses as with the "Charter". The Saskatchewan "Human Rights Code" (1979), the "Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms" (1977) and the Alberta "Bill of Rights" (1972) also contain devices like the notwithstanding clause. Outside Canada, Israel added a device similar to the notwithstanding clause to one of its Basic Laws in 1992. However, this power could be used only in respect of the right to work. In Victoria, Australia, section 31 of the "Victorian Charter of
Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
2034327
a result, by entering into land claims agreements, the government of Canada and members of an aboriginal people can establish new treaty rights, which are constitutionally recognized and affirmed. There are other sections of the "Constitution Act, 1982" that address aboriginal rights. Section 25 of the Charter provides that the guarantee of rights and freedoms in the Charter should not be understood to "abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada, including (a) any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7,
Constitution Act, 1982
1181432
rights and freedoms that emerged after World War II also wanted to entrench the principles enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The British Parliament formally enacted the Charter as a part of the" Canada Act 1982" at the request of the Parliament of Canada in 1982, the result of the efforts of the government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. One of the most notable effects of the adoption of the Charter was to greatly expand the scope of judicial review, because the Charter is more explicit with respect to the guarantee of rights and the role of judges
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
9345225
36, since section 24 refers only to the "Charter". Canadian poet George Elliott Clarke once analyzed section 34, calling it "bland legalese." He wrote it was "reassuring" because it was dull, signalling neither fear nor excitement. Thus, it seemed to imply the "Charter of Rights" was not a radical constitutional change, despite the fact that it was potentially revolutionary for a constitutional monarchy. In considering the name "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms," Clarke felt the first word, "Canadian," hinted at Canadian nationalism. He then compared this to the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen
Section 34 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
4730699
judicially reviewing court is one of "reasonableness" (not "correctness"). This general limitations clause definitely makes the "Canadian Charter" distinct from its United States counterpart, the Bill of Rights. Regarding similarities with the "European Convention on Human Rights", there are various limitations in the "European Convention" that are similar to the limitations clause in the "Charter". These limits include: However, unlike the "Canadian Charter", art. 18 of the "European Convention" limits all these specifically enumerated restrictions: "The restrictions permitted under this Convention to the said rights and freedoms shall not be applied for any purpose other than those for which they
Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
5417895
the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms right to life, liberty and security of the person. As well, he claimed that his social rights in section 45 of the "Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms" were violated. The Québec Court of Appeal was divided but ruled that the regulation did not violate the Canadian or Quebec "Charter". Two judges found a violation of section 15 of the Canadian "Charter", but only one found that it could not be saved by section 1. Another dissenting judge found a violation of section 45 of the Quebec "Charter". The Supreme Court decided by
Gosselin v Quebec (AG)