The role of judiciary is to administer justice to all citizens and it comprises of courts that take decisions on a very large number of cases. Judicial independence is the keystone of Canadian judicial system. That is the reason, the judiciary is an independent from other branches of government, the executive and legislative. The main role of judge is to interpret laws. Judicial independence assures that judges will have the capacity to make laws and settle on choices free of impact and in light of the law. Judges play a crucial role in Canadian democracy. The judicial branch of government constitutes the court system of Canada formally known as "the Queen on the Bench”, and is made up of many courts. It differs in levels based on legal superiority and is separated by jurisdiction. There are federal court as well as provincial or municipal courts. The Court assures uniformity, consistency and correctness in the articulation, development and interpretation of legal principles throughout the Canadian judicial system. Federal government has the right to legislate criminal whereas, provincial court has the control over the civil law. (Court system of Canada). The federal …show more content…
Their work, for the most part, attracts little notice. However, when judges decide issues concerning the constitutional powers of the state, attention is sure to follow. The adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 has greatly increased the number of such cases. The recognition of same-sex marriage, the existence and scope of Aboriginal rights, the legality of assisted suicide, the constitutionality of the offence of possession of pornography and the appropriate sentence for” mercy killing” these are but a few of the charged issues that our judges have been obliged to tackle in the two decades since the Charter was adopted”. ( Beverley McLachlin,
The Top Five Canada (Justice) v. Khadr Do you think the charter should always apply to the activities of the Canadian government officials exercising functions outside Canada? I concur with the Federal court's findings in that, The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were created to protect the rights and freedoms of Canadian citizens in Canada. Outside of Canada, citizens are protected by international laws between sovereign states. Therefore, crimes committed in other judicial sanctions should be dealt with by their own court of law, without interference of other countries sovereignty. The case of R. v. Cook is an exception; Canadian authorities interrogated Cook, a Canadian citizen, outside of Canada.
This method of legal governance was created based upon the common law system that is used in England and in some areas of Scotland. This organizational hierarchy is considered bi-jurisdictional, which is a result of the public and private laws being separated into the jurisdictions of the Parliament and the individual Provinces. Regardless of which unit is governing, each legal system is responsible for upholding the laws written in the Canadian Constitution. The Canadian Parliament has sole control over the transportation and energy infrastructures of the country, no matter which Province they reside
There are also no juries or witnesses and it involves only lawyers from both sides that argue the law and answer any questions the judges may have. There are seven judges at this level or one Chief Justice and six judges on the panel. The Chief Justice is elected by the court?s sitting judges and is elected a two-year term. Cases can be appealed to the Supreme Court that were heard in the Circuit Courts or the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court can override those courts decisions. The Supreme Court?s role is to guarantee a firm and reasonable judicial system and is the final arbitrator in disagreements that involve the state?s constitution and laws.
In the judicialization of the Canadian political system, the judicial system became hierarchical with the Supreme Court's jurisprudence binding on all other courts. The judicialization of Canadian politics began when the judiciary started producing landmark court rulings concerning various contest issues more frequently (Hunt, 2013). The Supreme Court achieved what national politicians trying to amend the constitution could not, acknowledgment and validation in protecting the Quebec society and its most important feature: the French language. It also entrenched the policies of the Official Languages (Articles 16-20, 23) and multiculturalism (Article
The government of Canada works in many levels, with the federal government at the highest standing. It is held together by many members who work in conjunction with each other to form a seamless system. There are three main branches of government which are known as the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. They have the power to administer and carry out laws, the power of making and amending laws, and the power to interpret the law and set penalties, respectively. Although these are separate branches that have their own roles, together they form Canada's government and allow the government to function properly.
Significance of Constitution Act of 1982 Canada has earned the title of being a peacemaking nation which is well deserved and known in the international community. It supports equality among everyone, protects and guarantees the rights of its citizens, and is considered a role model for protection of human rights around the world. However in Canada’s history, it’s society was once filled with prejudice and there were many discriminatory laws. This was evident in many historical events such as the mistreatment of the First Nations people, and the unfair Chinese Immigration Acts. Those laws had a very negative significant impact on the people.
Annotated Bibliography: Australian Court System Annotated Bibliography Opeskin, Brian. 2013. The state of the judicature: A statistical profile of Australian courts and judges. The Sydney Law Review, 35, (3): 489-517. This article by Opeskin (2013) aims to provide a detailed account of Australian courts that accurately reflects how it functions today.
In his book Judicial Tyranny: The New Kings of America, Mark Sutherland has assembled a wonderful cast of Christian attorneys, jurists, political scientists, and clergy who offer a rather perceptive analysis of judicial tyranny and our hope and means of restraining an overactive judiciary. Contributors include James Dobson, former U.S. Attorney General Edward Meese, former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, Don Feder, David Gibbs, Howard Phillips, Rev. Rick Scarborough, Phyllis Schlafly, and Herbert Titus among others. For too long, Congress has been complacent in the face of an overreaching, activist judiciary that has been out-of-step with the will of the great majority of the American people, and the judiciary has overstepped the bounds of
Judges are in the position to interpret law and to decide whether the policies put in place by the legislative and executive branches violate policy. In the case of Mr.
The Supreme Court is a part of the judicial branch of the United States government. They decide criminal and civil appeal cases that involve federal law. They also make sure that a law that congress or the president proposed is constitutional. There are nine Supreme Court judges. They have made decisions on racial segregation issues all the way to woman’s rights, including voting laws.
As a head of our government, the leader of our nation and the individual that Canadians look to for change and prosperity, the Prime Minister (next to the Governor General of Canada) holds the greatest amount of governing power. Democratic parliamentary systems like the one in Canada, compromise with their general population in order to give the people a voice within government. It is important to understand how the parliamentary system works in order to understand what administrative powers the Prime Minister executes and whether they are effective or not. The presence of a responsible government ensures Canadians that the governing body is an elected assembly instead of having a monarch in power. The Prime Minister, citizens of Canada, as
The quality of judges would without a doubt increase if they were appointed. However, I do not agree with the idea of judges being appointed. When looking at the partisan aspect you notice several possible issues with one issue being, is that individual the right person to do the job. Partisan election of judges allows for an individual that may not be as qualified for the job to be elected into the position. Nevertheless the partisan election of judges gives the voters what they want based on party affiliation along with qualifications.
When I think of the judicial system, I think of power and final decision making. In a sense, that concept can be scary. However, the judicial system by no means has as much power as one might think, and we can thank the Bill of Rights for that. Specifically, the 6th amendment is what protects us in a court of law. The 6th amendment sets boundaries and rules for trying and convicting a citizen of the United States, and that is why it is so beneficial to us.
Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.
Malaysian judiciary refers to the Malaysian court system. It is an independent body separate from the legislative and executive arms of government. The role of courts is to ensure the law and order are followed, that justice is done, and criminals are punished. The head of the judiciary is the Chief Justice.