The Charter is the center to which all Canadian rights circle around. It is what allows Canadians to freely express themselves. The Charter protects the rights and freedoms of every single individual in Canada. However, the Charter is especially large and covers many topics and so it tends to conflict itself. Seen in the case of speaking rights where, freely speaking about a topic can to lead to hate speech which can be a criminal offence. Religious rights also are sometimes impeached as sometimes allowing one person to follow their religious rights might hamper another person’s rights. Another way that the Charter may cause the impeachment of one person’s rights to protect another’s rights is seen in the case of equality rights and a person’s …show more content…
Under the charter people are free to practice their religion and express their beliefs. However even this has limitations in many cases practicing one’s religion has led to the impeachment of another’s rights. An example of religious rights being violated to protect another’s is seen the case of a Sikh teen wearing a kirpan3. In Sikhism, a person is tasked with wearing one of five different items always, to symbolize their belief in their top most religious figure. One of them being a kirpan which is a small knife or ceremonial dagger. It is meant to symbolize protection of the weak and self-defense but, wearing of such a weapon has been argued to be dangerous to those around such person as it is still a lethal weapon. Teachers believed that the student should not be able to wear the weapon on school grounds as it endangered the safety of nearby students. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in favor of individuals arguing that such a weapon impeached their rights to safety and as such the Supreme Court banned the wearing of such a weapon in places like school to protect the safety of the people4, even though this violates the religious rights of Sikhs. These cases of the niqab and kirpan show that a person’s religious rights can be violated if it violates another person’s right to safety and …show more content…
In my eyes the solution to this problem is to make the ruling based upon protection of a person’s wellbeing first. I don’t believe it fair for one person to endanger another person or a group of people just so that they can express what they believe. A person’s safety is something sacred that a society should work to protect. This works around something called the reasonable limits clause6, which works to protect all rights up until they promote hate speech, violence or inequality. To solve conflicts I believe it best serves the interest of the people to violate the right that could endanger another person. Another way such conflicts could be solved is by violating the right that effects the least number of people. As in make the ruling based upon making the least damage to a certain group or people. Such in the example of LGBTQ students using different washrooms, I believe a person should use the washroom based on biological sex and not gender identity as doing otherwise could endanger other people in a very private
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Citation R. v. NS, 2012 SCC 72,  3 S.C.R. 726 – Niqab removal trial Facts: NS who is a Muslim woman made a complaint of being sexually assaulted by 2 men within family during her childhood. Both men were charged for the assault in 2007. During the opening inquiry in 2008, NS explained she was going to testify with her niqab on for religious purposes Legal issue Removing the witness’s niqab violates section 2 of the Canadian charter of rights and freedom Decision The Supreme Court dismissed the plea and is preparing a list of questions in order to decide whether or not the witness should be allowed to wear the niqab during the trail for religious purposes
The monarchy in Canada is a continuous debate among the politicians and individuals. This paper aims to present the advantages and disadvantages of the monarchy in Canada. This way will enable us to take a clear position. First, Canadian politics are known for their divisive attitudes, and it is very hard to get consensus on decisions. The Queen plays the role of reference for the Canadian politicians and their decisions.
The Texas charter is the ordering report of presidency with the aid of the nation of Texas. The Texas charter can be amended as a joint decision as soon as 2/3 of the members of each homes of the nation Legislature recommend it, and then it's far authorised by most people of electorate certified to vote in elections for statewide places of work. In an election, this proposition may be heard in unique or normal classes of legislature. The reason it's been amended so regularly compared to the U.S. charter as it much less participating from governing our bodies to amend country constitutions than it's miles to amend the U.S. charter, which calls for 2/3 from both homes of Congress and then three/four of the states must vote to ratify. whilst an modification is proposed, the governor has no right to veto it and must undergo dialogue.
In 1982, Canada had almost gained its long awaited goal of complete independence from Britain. However, the British still had control over their most important document; the Constitution. By 1982, Trudeau believed that he had achieved enough goals as Prime Minister in order to convince the British to sign over the Constitution to Canada. This would be an extremely controversial and beneficial agreement for Canada, as they would have the power to govern themselves completely without being ordered by other parties. However, many Canadian leaders tried and failed in the past to patriate the Constitution, and trying to do so would be a huge political risk.
The Pros and Cons That Created The Constitution How did the Declaration of Independence influence the Constitution? The Declaration of Independence was the Colonies way of separation from Britain's power and control. To break free and become reconized as an Independent state.
The creation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms can be considered Trudeau’s most highly acknowledged accomplishment in his years as prime minister, giving Canada its current reputation of freedom and diversity. Trudeau wanted this charter to protect individual rights by preventing laws that unfairly discriminate or that belittle the essential human rights. It states that every Canadian receives the rights and freedoms which no government can expel regardless of race, gender or religion. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms that Trudeau wanted for the people of Canada was finally passed on April 17, 1982. Trudeau pledged to bring home a new constitution with charter of rights (Sauerwein).
In 1871, Canada’s first post-confederation treaty was signed in Fort Garry, Manitoba. This treaty set the tone for future treaties between the Crown and the First Nations. Although the treaties were written documents signed by both parties, they held vastly different understandings for the Crown and the First Nation people. The First Nation people’s understanding of what these treaties meant was different from what the Crown had intended.
Although Canada is one of the world’s most multicultural nations and is regarded as a leader in democracy, it has systematically targeted and excluded Muslim women from participating in their political freedom. Through the examination of the Niqab in Canadian society this essay will explore ways Muslim women have been “othered” in Canadian Society specifically concerned with the potential Niqab ban. A ban on the Niqab challenges and undermines the constitutional rights of Canadian Muslim women across Canada. A ban on the Niqab further segregates and excludes Canadian Muslim Woman, which in result incites a slur of negative outcomes.
In Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott the courts were faced with several conflicting interests concerning the fundamental rights of free speech, a core value of our democratic society. The respondent was upset that the four flyers contained discriminatory messages directed at a protected group and filled a complaint stating that those flyers contravene with section 14(1)(b) of The Saskatchewan Human Rights Codes (Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott, 2013). The Appellant (The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission) decided to appeal stating that section 14(1)(b) was a violation of section 2 of the Charter. The courts were then forced that ask themselves two questions, does section 14(1)(b) violate section 2 of the Charter and subsequently, if so, can section 1 of the Charter save section 14(1)(b). The subsequent paragraphs will discuss how the courts
Civic Reflection Issue 1- Change in Point of View The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights which outlines and protects the basic rights and fundamental freedoms that all Canadians have. These include the fundamental freedoms, democratic rights, mobility rights, legal rights, equality rights, language rights, and Aboriginal and treaty rights. The Canadian Charter of Rights is extremely important to the citizens of Canada as it has given important meaning to the protection of our rights. It makes sure that minorities and vulnerable groups are protected through equality rights.
Years ago, students were able to settle things off school grounds and say what they please and still have their rights. Another possible way for students to use their rights of free speech outside of school thinking it's okay to say things they aren't able to say in the walls of the school building. Students do have a right to privacy and free speech on a high school campus, but they need to understand that some of the things they say at school, about the school or on campus, or even discrimination of someone in the school that would impact the learning ability. Students have the right to free speech as long as they use those rights responsibly. The issue is that they will go outside of school calling out a teacher and all forms of social media
Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter states that, "all member states shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, nor in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations” . It is therefore a unilateral agreement signed by member states against the use of force when dealing each other. World events however since the signing and ratification of the UN Charter have indicated that states who are signatories to the charter continue to use force against each other for various reasons. Some 25 years after the writing and ratification of the charter one cannot doubt that states have used force and sought to justify it through individual or collective self-defence claims, as well as humanitarian claims in furtherance of national agendas and to increase territory. This no doubt may have been what frustrated Franck into the stance that Article 2(4) was in its grave.
The Senate in Canada should be abolished Introduction: Canada senate is a part of legislation institution in Canada, which represents the interests of upper class people. Different from America, it is not produced by election but directly-nominated by the premier and appointed by governor. Senate, governor, and the House of Commons are like three legs of a tripod which constitute the congress and legislation system in Canada. Senate undertakes the responsibility of proposing expostulation to governor and cabinet, which acts the role of supervision and restriction. Senate played critical role when Canada established federal government in 1867, the diversity of senators warrants the smooth convey of popular will to governors and legislators coming from different ethnic group and social status.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms first came into effect on April 17, 1982. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one part of the Canadian Constitution, created in 1867. The Constitution is a set of laws containing the basic rules about how a country operates. The Charter sets out those rights and freedoms that Canadians believe are necessary in a free and democratic society. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is an effective tool to ensure and maintain a just society as it protects the innocence of people, protects and ensures past laws and states fundamental freedoms, all of which work to create a thriving society.