Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Canadian charter of rights and freedoms document
Canadian charter of rights and freedoms document
Essays canadas charter of rights and freedoms
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Canadian charter of rights and freedoms document
Question 6: Discuss section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in relation to whether it has allowed for a significant advancement of equality rights in Canada.
In reality, has the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms allowed for meaningful improvement in the equality of its citizens lives? In section 15(1) and 15(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it is written that
“Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.”
“Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity
…show more content…
that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.” However, has this statement actually given significant advancements of equality rights in Canada for its citizens?
First through analyzing this statement then later explaining situations in which citizens of Canada have used section 15 to gain their legal rights we can state if section 15 in the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms has advanced equality rights of its citizens living in its country. Section 15 can be read to mean that each individual who lives in Canada and those who calls themselves a Canadian citizen has, in legal writing, the right to equal protection against criminal activity. Each person who is a permanent resident of Canada or citizen has the equal benefits of the law …show more content…
without being subjected to discrimination of race, sex, age, skin color, ethnic origin, mental and/or physical disability. Section 15(1) also addresses that the law must protect people of all races, sexual identity’s, physical appearances and mental disabilities from the presence of discrimination during the time in and out of the justice system. But to address the question in this essay on if section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom has allowed for significant advancement of equality rights in Canada, the answer would have to be yes and will be explained throughout this essay by breaking parts of Section 15 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to explain each section meaning, then there will be explanations about how and when Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has been implemented in the lives of its citizens and also how it has benefited the lives of each person who lives in Canada either as a permeant resident or as a legal citizen. “Every individual is equal before the law and under the law” This quote from Section 15 in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in itself explains how each individual no matter if they are Caucasian, African American, Asian, Middle Eastern, permanent resident, or citizen, the law must be legally administered in the same equal manner to each individual citizen who lives in Canada. It also clarifies that each citizen of Canada is to be subjected to the exact same criminal restrictions and regulations if they commit a crime no matter their gender, race, or sexuality. However, this section also means that the law must also equally protect each citizen in the same way without preference to sex, gender, race or sexuality. This section provides precision that even if an African American male is accused of the same crime as a Caucasian woman, they will both be punished under the law and each will have the same type of justice administered to them for committing the crime. “The right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law” This passage from the Charter clarifies that not only is each citizen of Canada is to be given the same legal benefits of the law but each individual who lives in Canada no matter their status has the legal right to equal protection by all administrators of justice. This segment further illuminates how each individual in Canada must be treated fairly and equally no matter their ethnic group, faith or gender. It also shows how individual has it in legal writing that every citizen in Canada must be protected by the law in the same way and be given law enforcement protection if they ever feel they are in danger of their “right to life, liberty and security” (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, Section 7). Section 15 court cases examples in benefitting citizens in Canada. Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is labeled as “Equality Rights” (Neil Boyd, 128) in course textbook and charter of rights and freedoms for a reason.
Section 15 legally “prohibits discrimination” (p. 128 Neil Boyd), although there will always be many cases where people are given unequal treatment within the law, it is not the fault of the Canadian charter of a person being wronged of their rights. This section was set in legal writing in the Canadian Charter for the individuals who felt that they have been wronged by the law and by citizens in this country by discrimination. Any and all individuals can quote Second 15(1) if they feel that discrimination has occurred and they wish to be administered by the law fairly and equally in all circumstances. For example of a situation in which a Section 15 violation had occurred was in the case of Vriend v. Alberta (1998). The reason why this case was called for a Section 15 violation was because Delwin Vriend was fired and discriminated because of his sexual orientation as a gay man. In 1998, Delwin Vriend was known as a hard-working Canadian citizen who would generally receive promotions and salary increases for his prestigious work. However, in 1998 Vriend was fired on the basis of his sexual orientation. Vriend had first wanted to file the wrongfulness that he had experienced under as discrimination to the “Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act” however he was prevented from making a complaint
because, as quoted from Landmark Case: Sexual Orientation and the Charter p.1 “sexual orientation was not included as a protected ground under the Individual Rights Protection Act” of Alberta. After being rejected by Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act, Vriend filed a statement stating that his unfair unemployment status due to discrimination towards his sexuality was a violation of his rights under Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Vriend had taken his case to the Supreme Court on “November 4, 1997, and the written decision was released on April 2, 1998” (Landmark Case: Sexual Orientation and the Charter p.2). The final decision of the supreme court was that firing a person based on their sexual identity was against Vriend legal rights and “that the sections of the IRPA were unconstitutional and that “sexual orientation” should be read into the IRPA as a protected ground” (Landmark case: Sexual Orientation and the Charter p.3) . In many cases, Canadian citizens have been able to appeal to the Supreme court if they felt that they were wronged by other citizens by discrimination which had violated their Section 15 right to equal treatment, on the other hand, there have been a few cases where people who were not fully Canadian citizens and were only permanent residents that had been discriminated against in Canada but used Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights. An example of a case that had a situation in which a non-Canadian citizen used Section 15 in order to stop discrimination in Canada was in the legal case of Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia. The Andrews vs. Law Society of British Columbia was a dispute that started when Mr. Andrews had been denied to practice law in Canada because he was not a Canadian citizen. Although Mr. Andrews had held all the legal credentials and education to be practice law, he was denied entry into the profession because he held citizenship in the United Kingdom instead of Canada. Mr. Andrews applied his case to the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Andrews had stated that he was being treated unfairly because of his citizenship and it was unfair that the profession he was applying to be in did not accept him because he was a citizen of United kingdoms. This situation was especially upsetting to Mr. Andrews because he was aware and noted that many other occupations in Canada did not require a Canadian citizenship but he was not allowed to practice law because he wasn’t a citizen of Canada. The British Columbia court of appeal ruled In favor of Mr. Andrews because it was unfair and it did show a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 15 equality human rights. The Andrews court case was based on if the requirement of Canadian citizenship is needed for employment in the legal profession in Canada and whether or not this was a violation of citizen rights in Canada, the supreme court of Canada agreed that legal requirement of Canadian citizenship was a section 15 violation. The reason on why Andrews case was so successful was because as “Every individual is equal” no matter their sexuality or nationally, lawyer and each must be treated equally under the law, the Andrew court case was a prime example of how section 15 of Canadian charter of rights and freedoms not only cares about the equality’s of Canadian citizens of Canada but also those who do not own citizenship but choose to live their lives in Canada. Over the years, Canadian society has changed in multiple ways since its creation in July 1st, 1867. Although there were unspoken agreements between citizens on what was right and wrong, it took until April 17th, 1982 to have a legal Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms document stating what the fundamental rights of each Canadian citizen had. Although many could say that without the charter citizens would still consider understanding what each citizen legal rights are but humans are imperfect and tend to try to take away human civil rights away from each other. Having the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom forces each citizen, organization, government offices, and all types of different individuals that each person has an equal right in Canada because not only is it their human right, it is law binding to equally govern justice to each individual no matter their race, sexuality, gender, disabilities physical or mental or their original nationality. Discrimination is a hard issue to face in society, it isn’t one that people are generally comfortable and it is a hard subject to fight against for those who live with it in their everyday lives. Because of section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Canadian citizens such as Delwin Vriend were given the chance to explain why it was unfair and unjust for a hardworking Canadian citizen to lose his job and be discriminated against because of his sexuality. Also for Cases such as the case of Andrews v. Law society of British Columbia, Mr. Andrews was given the legal right to fight to work in Canada a country he resides even though he was not a Canadian citizen. Administrators of justice in Canada have been legally forced to act lawfully and fairly towards each individual citizen of Canada regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual identity and country of origin and citizenship. Section 15 legally enforces people officers of the law, judges in the courts and citizens in town to practice the rules of law in an equal fair manner.
In the case of Canada v. Bedford, three sex workers in Ontario Canada, Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch and Valerie Scott, challenged the Charter as they stated that the following sections in the Criminal Code violate the rights promised and protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; CC s 210, CC s. 212(1) (j), and CC s. 213(1) (c). These sections “make it an offence to keep or be in a bawdy-house, prohibit living on the avails of prostition, and prohibits communicating in public for the purposes of prostitution,” (Canada v. Bedford, 2013, 6-3). The women claimed that these restrictions did not, in fact, prevent but implement more danger for anyone in the field of work. The women claimed that these restrictions went against their rights protected under s. 2(b) of the Charter as it disabled them from their right to freedom of expression (Canada v. Bedford, 2013, 6). As the provisions were set to prevent “public nuuisance” and “exploitation of prositutes,” they in fact go against the rights in s. 7 of the Charter. Thus, being under declaration of invalidity. This in fact brings upon question on whether it is the right decision to allow prostitution without any regulation in order to impose that the the Charter is not being violated, or whether to suspend the declaration until a proper method has been developed (while infringing the rights of those in the field of work). Ultimately, all of the laws were struck down by the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada.
Apart from the other laws in Canada’s constitution, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is an important law that affects every Canadian’s rights and freedoms. It was created in 1981 by former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau to provide legal protection for the most important rights and freedoms. These rights include fundamental freedoms, democratic rights, mobility rights, and legal rights. Most but not all articles included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are protected in the constitution. However, if a Canadian feels that their rights are violated, they can challenge laws and unfair actions using the justice system. In my opinion, I believe the Canadian Charter of Human Rights somewhat protects Canadians’ rights and freedoms to some extent depending on the situation.
A proper analysis of why this is so would require a book-length account of the constitutional and political history of Canada and the United States. It would include but would not be limited to the selection and role of judges, the role of legislatures and political leadership, the attitudes and practices of the police and administrative agencies, and, not least, popular attitudes towards rights, minorities, and government. In short, the whole of a person’s way of life. Bibliography McKercher, William R., ed. The U.S. Bill of Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights.
Since 1914, Canadian Human Rights laws have had a positive impact on helping to shape Canadian identity as one that is welcoming to various minority groups. Being a Canadian citizen provides you with the freedoms to travel, and settle in Canada at your own will and desire. Also, the freedom to express your sexual orientation is welcomed and well supported in many communities. Modern discrimination against categorizing human beings is very slim and everyone of all ethnic or cultural backgrounds are welcome with respect and good intentions. Canada is an extremely welcoming and protective place, in which nearly everything is done to promote equality, and a safe country.
In the year 1957, Canada elected its first Prime minister without English or French root, John Diefenbaker. While growing up in the city of Toronto, because of his German name, he was often teased. [1] He grew up as an outcast, and so he was able to relate to the discrimination and inequality many of the minorities in Canada felt. This essay will attempt to answer the question: To what extent did Prime Minister John Diefenbaker help promote equality to the minority communities. . The minorities in this time period were the women, aboriginals, and immigrants. During his time as the Prime Minister, he was able to help protect the rights of this group because many of their rights were being abused by the society. Diefenbaker also helped the minorities to stand up for themselves and other groups. Diefenbaker was able to bring positive change to the minority communities by making an official Bill of Rights and appointing people of discriminated groups to the parliament while other members did not.
Cameron, Jamie. "Justice in Her Own Right: Bertha Wilson and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." The Law Society of Upper Canada. N.p., 2008. Web. 29 Dec. 2013. .
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the strong foundation for the diverse country of Canada. They uphold various beliefs and values Canadians may have. Under the constitution in 1982, the CRF (Charter of Rights and Freedoms) was entrenched by then Prime Minister Trudeau. The CRF has 4 rights; Equality, legal, democratic and mobility, there is also 4 freedoms; of Conscience and Religion, of thought, belief, expression and media, of peaceful assembly, and Association. If people feel that their right and/or freedom has been violated, they can go to court by using a “Charter Challenge. ” A charter challenge is when something inequitable or unfair has been done, the citizen can pursue the court case stating that something violated their rights and/or freedoms. All the rights and freedoms help
"that all free white persons who, have, or shall migrate into the United States, and shall give satisfactory proof, before a magistrate, by oath, that they intend to reside therein, and shall take an oath of allegiance, and shall have resided in the United States for one whole year, shall be entitled to the rights of citizenship."
Three decades ago, honorable 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. The Charter of Rights and Freedom protects legal rights of Canadian whether they are a teenager or an adult, protects equality rights of Canadian and provides government services to all Canadians no matter what, ensures all laws are passed according to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and provides equality rights and fundamental freedoms to Canadians for practicing their religion and other rights without interference.
“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the united States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefits of all law and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.”
Systemic discrimination has been a part of Canada’s past. Women, racial and ethnic minorities as well as First Nations people have all faced discrimination in Canada. Policies such as, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, provincial and federal Human Rights Codes, as well has various employment equity programs have been placed in Canada’s constitution to fight and address discrimination issues. Despite these key documents placed for universal rights and freedoms Aboriginal and other minority populations in Canada continue to be discriminated against. Many believe there is no discrimination in Canada, and suggest any lack of success of these groups is a result of personal decisions and not systemic discrimination. While others feel that the legislation and equality policies have yet resulted in an equal society for all minorities. Racism is immersed in Canadian society; this is clearly shown by stories of racial profiling in law enforcement.
“Honey, you’re not a person, now get back in the kitchen and make me a sandwich!” If a husband were to say these words to his wife today, he would likely receive a well-deserved smack to the face. It is not until recently that Canadian women have received their status as people and obtained equal rights as men. Women were excluded from an academic education and received a lesser pay than their male counter parts. With the many hardships women had to face, women were considered the “slave of slaves” (Women’s Rights). In the past century, women have fought for their rights, transitioning women from the point of being a piece of property to “holding twenty-five percent of senior positions in Canada” (More women in top senior positions: Report). The Married Women’s Property Act, World War I, The Person’s Case, and Canadian Human Rights Act have gained Canadian women their rights.
In the summer of 1787, delegates from the 13 states convened in Philadelphia and drafted a remarkable blueprint for self-government, the Constitution of the United States. The first draft set up a system of checks and balances that included a strong executive branch, a representative legislature and a federal judiciary. The Constitution was remarkable, but deeply flawed. For one thing, it did not include a specific declaration, or bill, of individual rights. It specified what the government could do but did not say what it could not do. For another, it did not apply to everyone. The "consent of the governed" meant propertied white men only. The Bill of Rights did not come from a desire to protect the liberties won in the American Revolution, but rather from a fear of the powers of the new federal government.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted under the Pierre Trudeau government on April 17, 1982. According to Phillip Bryden, “With the entrenchment of the Charter into the Canadian Constitution, Canadians were not only given an explicit definition of their rights, but the courts were empowered to rule on the constitutionality of government legislation” (101). Prior to 1982, Canada’s central constitutional document was the British North America Act of 1867. According to Kallen, “The BNA Act (the Constitution Act, 1867) makes no explicit reference to human rights” (240). The adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms significantly transformed the operation of Canada’s political system. Presently, Canadians define their needs and complaints in human rights terms. Bryden states, “More and more, interest groups and minorities are turning to the courts, rather than the usual political processes, to make their grievances heard” (101). Since it’s inception in 1982 the Charter has become a very debatable issue. A strong support for the Charter remains, but there also has been much criticism toward the Charter. Academic critics of the Charter such as Robert Martin believe that the Charter is doing more harm than good, and is essentially antidemocratic and UN-Canadian. I believe that Parliament’s involvement in implementing the Charter is antidemocratic, although, the Charter itself represents a democratic document. Parliament’s involvement in implementing the Charter is antidemocratic because the power of the executive is enhanced at the expense of Parliament, and the power of the judiciary is enhanced at the expense of elected officials, although, the notwithstanding clause continues to provide Parliament with a check on...
The Bill of Rights was created because the states believed that the federal government would have too much power and they wanted to have more individual rights. Around this time the colonies had just been under the British rule, which oppressed the people and give them very limited freedoms. The states or the colonies were kind of afraid that this would happen all over again within this new government forming in the form of the Constitution. Most of the state at this time believed that the Constitution alone was enough but others felt that they needed more assurances. In the end, the federal government complied with these states and gave them the Bill of Rights.