Section 9-24 Essay

444 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essay on charter rights

When Canada created the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, they set it as “supreme law”, meaning that all other laws must follow and abide by the charter. This means that police also need to uphold the Charter. For example, Sections 8-10 and 24 especially have an impact on police. Section 8 says, “Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure” (2018). Police officers perform searches all the time, whether it be after an arrest, enforcing a search warrant, pat downs for officer safety, etc. Police officers need to abide by this law, otherwise any evidence they might have seized can be thrown out of court, or the subject being arrested could be released! The same applies to section 9, where it says that every person in this country cannot be “arbitrarily …show more content…

Section 10, meanwhile, explains that when someone is arrested, they have the right to know why, and give them the right to instruct counsel without delay. This is why all police officers read a “caution” from a piece of paper, or their notebook that details all their rights. If they do not do this, then the arrest can be made invalid and the person arrested can walk! Finally, Section 24 of the Charter states that any person who has had their Charter rights denied or infringed on can apply to the courts for remedy (2018). Basically, if my rights have been violated, I can seek compensation from the agency that infringed on my rights, which makes the particular police officer look very bad in the eyes of the public, and even his own agency!To make one last point, a co-worker/boss of mine, Dean Boyer, works for the Corporate Investigations department for Alberta Health Services, and he investigates claims of excessive force, charter violations, or other complaints. I asked him about his opinion, and he stated that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was created for police officers. It was set out

Show More
Related

  • Litigation of R. v. Buhay

    1197 Words  | 3 Pages

    The litigation of R. v. Buhay is a case where the Charter of rights and freedoms was violated by the policing parties but maintained and performed by the Supreme Court of Canada. This litigation began after two individuals; of which one was Mervyn Buhay, rented a locker at the Winnipeg bus depot. Buhay began to distract the security guards while his friend placed a duffel bag in the locker they had rented. After they left, the security guards were so engrossed by the smell coming from the locker that they unlocked it to find a sleeping bag full of marijuana in the duffel bag. Buhay was arrested the day after the bag was taken into possession even though no warrant was received to search the locker in the first place. During the first trial, due to the violation of the Charter by the police officers, Buhay was acquitted. The Crown, however, appealed this ruling and the case was taken to the Supreme Court of Canada where once again Buhay was acquitted in a 9-0 ruling. Although Buhay committed a crime by possessing marijuana, the police violated the Charter by searching Buhay`s locker without a warrant or his consent, making the Supreme court of Canada`s decision to acquit Buhay reasonable. The Supreme Court of Canada`s decision to acquit Buhay was reasonable due to the fact that the police violated the Charter of rights, no warrant was received to unlock the locker let alone seize the duffel bag, and lastly because the bus depots terms for the locker were not efficiently provided to the customers making them aware of any reasonable search conduct.

    Read More

  • R. vs Oakes Case and Reasonable Limits Clause

    760 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is an important document that allows us to live our lives without arbitrary governmental control, although there may be certain times when rights should be limited. The R. v Oakes case is a perfect example of this situation coming into play. David Edwin Oakes was caught with an unlawful possession of hash oil and was automatically convicted of trafficking, under section 8 of the Narcotic Control Act. By looking at the Charter, it was clear that section 8 of the NCA violated his right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, guaranteed in section 11.d. With that in mind, the respondent brought in a motion that challenged section 8 of the Narcotic Control Act. Since the Supreme Court and the Crown were confident that the suspect was trafficking narcotics, they created a four criteria ruling, in order to reasonably limit the rights of the respondent. This is permissible under section 1 of the Charter, which states that “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms…only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law.”2 The respondent’s case passed the first criterion which stated that “the reasoning for limiting the Charter must be proven important enough to override a constitutionally protected right.” The case did not pass the second criterion which stated that “there must be an appropriate connection between the limitation of rights and the objective of the legislation.”2 Therefore, the appeal was dismissed and the respondent was released. After reviewing the case it was clear that even though the suspect did not have his rights limited against him, limiting rights should be used more often in severe cases.

    Read More

  • Does the Canadian Charter Effectively Protect our Human Rights?

    649 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Comparison of US Bill of Rights and The Canadian Charter of Rights

    1400 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...wo constitutional documents may be similar in respect to their provisions respecting rights, it would not necessarily follow that claims of violation of rights would receive the same response from the courts of both nations. 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 people’s way of life.

    Read More

  • R Vs. Oakes Case Study

    1321 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mann (2004) is another precedent setting Supreme Court case, whose main issue dealt with search and seizure laws that infringed upon Phillip Mann’s rights that are guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The issue that was brought before the court was if the investigative detention against Mann was a violation of his section 8 Charter rights, which states that “everyone has the right to be secure against an unreasonable search and seizure”. The purpose of the search was to determine if Mann was in possession of illegal weapons because it so happened to be that he was in the same place a crime scene investigation for a burglary was happening and coincidentally matched the suspect description. While police were searching Mann, the officer felt a soft bag in Mann’s sweater pocket. Even though the officer was aware they were only investigating for weapons, the officer intentionally pulled out the bag of Marijuana and arrested Mann immediately. This case went to the Supreme Court, where the court stated that “investigative detention was definitely reasonable given that Mann matched the suspect description and was close to the crime scene, but it was not done for valid objective because the cops could only search for officer safety- once soft object was felt, there was no risk (i.e was not a gun)- ultimately determining that the officer should not have pulled the bag out of Mann’s pocket, resulting in the Supreme Court ruling that the search

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Charter Of Rights And Freedoms

    541 Words  | 2 Pages

    In conclusion, Canada is held strong with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As citizens know their rights and freedoms they can help change the shape of Canada by Charter Challenges. Changes move

    Read More

  • Chapter 9 essay

    828 Words  | 2 Pages

    Neil Postman begins chapter 9 of his book Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, by discussing if politics is actually a spectator sport or if politics is just like the way show business is run. This chapter is titled ‘Reach out and Elect someone’, and Postman first writes about how politics is more like a "spectator sport" or, as Ronald Reagan put it, "like show business" (125).

    Read More

  • Miranda vs. Arizona

    396 Words  | 1 Pages

    The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow a code of conduct when arresting suspects. After an arrest is made, before they may begin questioning they must first advise the suspect of their rights, and make sure that the suspect understands them. These rights are known as the Miranda Warnings and include:

    Read More

  • The Difference between the Miranda Rights and the Charter of Rights

    903 Words  | 2 Pages

    Missing from this article is an explanation of what Miranda rights are, and how are they different from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Miranda rights, also known as the Miranda warning, is a warning given by police in the United States to suspects in custody before they are interrogated. The name 'Miranda rights' comes from the case Miranda v. Arizona, where the Supreme Court held that the admission of incriminating statements by a suspect who has not been read their rights, violates one's right to council. Therefore if a police officer does not inform a suspect of their Mi...

    Read More

  • Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms

    1059 Words  | 3 Pages

    One of the Legal Rights the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects is: The right to be free of imprisonment, search, and seizure without reasons backed by the law. “In a undisclosed school in Canada, there was a sudden police checking, in which police dogs roamed around the hallway of the school to see if there was any suspicious substance or object. During the checking, the police fo...

    Read More

  • The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

    2464 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II April 17, 1982. Often referred to as the Charter, it affirms the rights and freedoms of Canadians in the Constitution of Canada. The Charter encompasses fundamental freedoms, democratic rights, mobility rights, legal rights, language rights and equality rights. The primary function of the Charter is to act as a regulatory check between Federal, Provincial and Territorial governments and the Canadian people. Being a successor of the Canadian Bill of Rights that was a federal statute, amendable by Parliament, the Charter is a more detailed and explicit constitutional document that has empowered the judiciary to render regulations and statutes at both the federal and provincial levels of government unconstitutional. Although the rights and freedoms of Canadians are guaranteed, Sections one and seven of the Charter permit the federal and provincial governments to limit the rights and freedoms enjoyed by Canadians. Section one of the Charter designated ‘Rights and freedoms in Canada’ states “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” This section is frequently referred to and better known as the reasonable limits clause. The second rights and freedoms limiting section of the Charter, known as the ‘notwithstanding clause’ is Section thirty-three entitled ‘Exception where express declaration’ declares

    Read More

  • Police Brutality In Canada

    1265 Words  | 3 Pages

    First of all article 7 is not respected: “ No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” It is clear that using physical violence and abusing the use of weapons is in fact, a vicious and ruthless way to treat innocent humans. No matter how much authority policemen have, it should not allow them to abuse of it. As an example, I will use the case of Orlando Bowen, a professional football player that played for the Canadian league. On March 26, 2004, Bowen was at a night club celebrating a contract he had just signed with the Toronto Argonauts. Two disguised police officers approached him to ask if he was carrying any drugs with him. The football player informed them that he did not have any drugs on him and after the policemen kept insisting, he decided to leave. He was threatened by the officers as they suggested that he stays with them or else they will shoot him and Bowen immediately obeyed. With no proof, Bowen was arrested for possession of cocaine after he was brutally beaten by the officers for no valuable reason. It is important to note that Bowen was not aware of what he was being charged for until he was put in jail and he assured that the drugs that were found on him did not belong to him. Bowen was charged with possession

    Read More

  • Miranda Rights: Transforming Crime and Justice

    1808 Words  | 4 Pages

    However. On October 8, 2010, The American Miranda rule that gives a suspect the right to have a lawyer present during questioning has “no place” here, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled Friday, rules buy(Blue Line.). Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, the 17th and current Chief Justice of Canada, and Canadian jurist Justice Louise Charron . “In the main case, the justices ruled 5-4 that the Charter of Rights does not confer a right to have a lawyer present during interrogation.” Meaning, those rights that the cops read on the cheesy television shows don't

    Read More

  • Charter Of Rights In Canada

    390 Words  | 1 Pages

    In addition to Canadian peacekeeping missions, the establishment of freedom and charter of right further lead to changes in Canadians society and legal court. The main purpose of the charter of rights is to “Protect minorities from preliminary majorities”(The Canadian Encyclopedia). By ensuring protections and releasing the pressure of minorities, the economic, social, and political opportunities between different ethical citizens are enhanced. After the charter was proposed, an amending formula states it requires “at least 50%” consents of Canadian citizens instead of a request from a specific group(The Canadian Encyclopedia). Canadian governments also surveyed 300 Canadians about their ideology of the previous legal system in order to construct

    Read More

  • The Importance Of Legal Rights In Canada

    552 Words  | 2 Pages

    Have you ever needed to go to court? Most citizens do, for whatever reason weather it be for legal reasons or you weren’t treated fairly in the workplace, the charter of rights and freedoms has your back, it has laws placed so you can be protected. There are a lot of rights, such as Legal rights, Equality rights, and a Fundamental freedoms. All these rights affect all Canadians at one point.

    Read More

More about Section 9-24 Essay

Open Document