Unluckily, Toure could not be deported due to the lack of proof of his citizenship in Guinea and they would not take him back. On top of his complicated situation, Toure still has to deal with Canada’s border police insisting that he is a high risk detainee because of his criminality in the United States regarding his non-violent issues 12 years ago. Four years later, Toure is still stuck in jail with no way of knowing when he will gain his freedom back. Toure thought that Canada was the best place in the world which is why he chose to come here. I believe that locking
He saw himself as a failure or coward because he was unable to follow his gut instinct and choose to run to Canada and escape the draft. But, is he really a coward. Was he not courageous in realizing that if he ran away from the war he would have to run forever from his draft notice? Eventually he would run out of road so he might as well face his draft notice now before he puts it aside and never forgives himself. Was Tim O’Brien not courageous because he realized he had to do what was necessary, courage is what helped him face his
Introduction Although Canada is universally known as safe haven for refugees, hundreds of unwanted immigrants across the country are held captive under maximum security. Despite the circumstances of these immigrants and refugees, I believe that keeping an innocent man locked behind bars in maximum security is unfair and hostile. Using Rawl’s Veil of Ignorance, I will be analyzing Ebrahim Toure’s conviction. I will also be applying the Potter Box Model of Reasoning by explaining every detail of his case and exploring the values, the principles and the loyalties that lies within this wrongful conviction to conclude with moral standpoint for Ebrahim Toure. Definition Toure was arrested on February 23, 2013 and has been imprisoned for the last four years in maximum security.
Louis Riel went against the Canadian government because he was trying to help and support the Metis. Riel did not want the Metis to lose their rights. Louis Riel was the leader in the 2 rebellions. He was the leader in the rebellion because he wanted to make sure that the Metis could keep their lands. Going against the Canadian government and sacrificing his own life for the Metis proves that Louis Riel is a hero, a visionary and a leader who will be remembered for his
The Tribunal found that Stewart was let go due to a breach of Elk Valley’s anti-drug policy, not as a result of his addiction, dismissing his complaint. Furthermore, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench and the Alberta Court of Appeal affirmed the verdict. The Supreme Court recognized the fact that accommodating Stewart for his addiction would provoke Elk Valley with undue hardship. As a result, The Court upheld the prior decisions of the Alberta Court of Appeal and Alberta Human Rights Tribunal. ISSUES Was the termination of Stewart’s employment in violation of his s. 15 rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
The Red River Resistance The next major event was the Red River Resistance. In this event, Sir John Macdonald sent out surveyors to divide the Canadian land because the Hudson’s Bay Company had sold Rupert’s land to the Canadian government. This sparked an outrage with the Métis because they wanted to keep their current laws. Due to conflicts and arguments about the land, a surveyor was executed by the Métis leader which worsened the situation. In return for the surveyor’s death, the British Canadians ordered the death of the Métis leader which ended the conflict.
Kamenev, Bukharin, and Zinoviev, who were some of his rivals for power, were executed in a show trial. Anyone that crossed Stalin met the same fate, and he began to make himself a dictator. Stalin was increasingly paranoid and power hungry, and thought that everyone around him was plotting against him, because of this he demanded constant praise and devotion from his citizens. His first purges began around the early 1930s, when he began to take over the farms from their owners to turn them into collective farms owned by the state. Anyone who refused was executed, and the rest, about 5 million, were deported to forced labour camps located mainly in Siberia.
The Canadian government shows respect to issues of other nations, but not First Nations. During the Quebec referendum, Canadian Politician and chief of the Red Sucker Lake community Elijah Harper declined the Meech Lake Accord because Canada was addressing the issues of Quebec instead of First Nations. The accord was about Quebec becoming “distinct society”, this insulted Elijah Harper when First Nations have been trying to become a distinct society and get special treatment. First Nations have been trying to reclaim their land for decades, but the Canadian government pushed aside the issues of First Nations and put the needs of Quebec above theirs. This explains how the federal government does not acknowledge the issues of First Nations.
In June 1990, the residents of Toronto voted in favor to recommend to the Canadian government. One of the changes made to the lyrics of the anthem “O Canada” was from "in all, thy sons command" to “in all of us command”. In this part of the anthem, the word “sons” implied that women cannot feel true patriotism or love for Canada so Canadian’s woman feel offended. Other changes to the lyrics include the words of “our home and gracious land” instead of “our home and native land". Some Canadians feel that the words "Native Land" were not appropriated mainly for those non-native born (Moscoe).In this way, the song includes the people of the First Nation tribes and everyone in Canada is represented and can sing it joyfully.
As a matter of fact, the 44th count was dismissed as inadequate by the lower court in its instruction to the jury. However, they did instruct the jury that "Before you can find the defendants guilty you must be certain of his guilt as charged on the counts of the indictment beyond a reasonable doubt." Ironically, the lower court then prepped the jury extensively on the principle of reasonable doubt and how it relates to evidence (Knappman, Edward W). By and large, the appeal of the case to the Supreme Court was rooted in part on the lower court 's refusal to allow the 44th count. Ultimately, their task was to decide whether the lower court had violated the defendants ' rights by not instructing the jury on the presumption of innocence, assuming that reasonable doubt was fundamentally the same as presumption of innocence.