Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
→top: over |
||
| (23 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Federal civil rights statute in Canada}}
{{About|the Canadian federal statute enacted in 1960|the charter of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada|Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms}}
{{Infobox legislation
Line 32 ⟶ 33:
{{italictitle}}
{{Constitutional history of Canada}}
The '''''Canadian Bill of Rights'''''<ref>Canadian Bill of Rights, S.C. 1960, c. 44.</ref> ({{
The ''Canadian Bill of Rights'' remains in effect but is widely acknowledged to be limited in its effectiveness because it is a federal statute only, and so not directly applicable to provincial laws.<ref name="BoyleFinnie2002">{{cite book|author1=Alan E. Boyle|author2=Wilson Finnie|author3=Andrea Loux, Chris Himsworth, Hector MacQueen|title=Human Rights and Scots Law|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SZSSuFFsD_QC&pg=PA177|year=2002|publisher=Hart Publishing|isbn=978-1-84113-044-6|page=177}}</ref><ref name="Turner2009">{{cite book|author=Francis J. Turner|title=Encyclopedia of Canadian Social Work|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=StvfAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA42|date=23 July 2009|publisher=Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press|isbn=978-1-55458-807-7|pages=41, 42}}</ref> These legal and constitutional limitations were a significant reason that the ''[[Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms]]'' was established as an unambiguously-constitutional-level Bill of Rights for all Canadians, governing the application of both federal and provincial law in Canada, with the [[patriation]] of the [[Constitution of Canada]] in 1982. Since patriation, its usefulness at federal law in Canada is mostly limited to issues pertaining to the enjoyment of property, as set forth in its section 1(a)]—a slightly-broader "life, liberty, and security of the person" right than is recognized in [[Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms|section seven of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'']].<ref name="Greene2014">{{cite book|author=Ian Greene|title=The Charter of Rights and Freedoms: 30+ years of decisions that shape Canadian life|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vv6lBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT66|date=18 November 2014|publisher=James Lorimer Limited, Publishers|isbn=978-1-4594-0662-9|page=66}}</ref>
==Background==
===Saskatchewan's Bill of Rights===
In 1947, [[Saskatchewan]]
===United Nations===
Line 50 ⟶ 52:
On March 16, 1950, a decade before the ''Canadian Bill of Rights'' became law, Diefenbaker, then a Saskatchewan MP, told a public forum why such a law was needed. Individuals' freedoms of religion, press, speech and association are threatened by the state, he said. A Bill of Rights was needed to take a "forthright stand against discrimination based on colour, creed or racial origin".<ref>Radio Clip: [http://www.cbc.ca/archives/categories/politics/prime-ministers/john-diefenbaker-dief-the-chief/the-canadian-bill-of-rights.html John Diefenbaker: Dief the Chief. The Canadian Bill of Rights.]</ref>
Diefenbaker advocated for the adoption of a bill of rights during the federal election campaign of 1957.<ref name="McMillanYellowhorn2009">{{cite book|author1=Alan D. McMillan|author2=Eldon Yellowhorn|title=First Peoples In Canada|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tvSrEUFH3vkC&pg=PA323|date=1 December 2009|publisher=D & M Publishers|isbn=978-1-926706-84-9|page=323}}</ref> In 1960, as prime minister, Diefenbaker introduced the ''Canadian Bill of Rights'', and it was enacted by Parliament.<ref name="Schabas2008" />
==Features==
Line 62 ⟶ 64:
Section 2 of the Bill of Rights reads as follows:
:2. Every law of Canada shall, unless it is expressly declared by an Act of the Parliament of Canada that it shall operate notwithstanding the ''Canadian Bill of Rights'', be so construed and applied as not to abrogate, abridge or infringe or to authorize the abrogation, abridgement or infringement of any of the rights or freedoms herein recognized and declared, and in particular, no law of Canada shall be construed or applied so as to:
::(a) authorize or effect the arbitrary detention, imprisonment or exile of any person;
Line 84 ⟶ 86:
==Criticism and support==
Criticism of the Bill of Rights has mostly centred on its limited effect. The ineffectiveness of the Bill of Rights in achieving its stated aim was the main reason that two decades later, it was thought necessary<ref name=Kasoff>{{Cite book| last1 = Kasoff| first1 = Mark J. | last2 = James| first2 = Patrick| title = Canadian Studies in the New Millennium, Second Edition (Google eBook)| publisher = University of Toronto Press| year = 2013| location = Toronto, Ontario, Canada
The Bill of Rights was (and is) limited in several ways.
Line 90 ⟶ 92:
Firstly, it does not explicitly amend any conflicting statutes, either to remove conflicts or to insert explicit allowances for the statutes to operate notwithstanding the Bill of Rights.<ref name="Peaslee1956">{{cite book|author=Amos Jenkins Peaslee|title=Constitutions of nations|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6aUGNB3qteMC&pg=PA207|year=1956|publisher=Brill Archive|page=207|id=GGKEY:3DG2ENRE077}}</ref> When called upon to apply conflicting laws, the courts typically sought to interpret a later statute as creating a minimal disturbance of earlier law.<ref name="Macklem2001">{{cite book|author=Patrick Macklem|title=Indigenous Difference and the Constitution of Canada|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=quM1xyFyfhQC&pg=PA210|year=2001|publisher=University of Toronto Press|isbn=978-0-8020-8049-3|pages=162, 210}}</ref> In practice, that meant that the courts relied on Parliament to repeal or amend any laws contrary to the Bill of Rights.<ref>Adam Dodek. [https://policymagazine.ca/pdf/27/PolicyMagazineJulyAugust-2017-Dodek.pdf "The Supreme Court at Canada's 150th"]. ''Policy'', July/August 2017, page 24.</ref> Disappointments for those who wanted courts to enforce rights vigorously included ''[[Bliss v Canada (AG)]]'' and ''[[Canada (AG) v Lavell]]''. A notable exception was ''[[R v Drybones]]''.
Second, since the Bill of Rights was not a constitutional amendment, there was some{{explain|date=February 2022}} debate{{by who|date=February 2022}} as to whether it was binding on future
Third, because it is an ordinary statute, the authority of the Bill of Rights is limited to matters set out in [[Section 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867]], as being under the legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada.
However, the 1960 Act enumerates some rights (such as property rights and specific legal rights) not protected under the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms''. For that and other reasons, the 1960 Act is
==See also==
Line 104 ⟶ 106:
*[[New Zealand Bill of Rights Act]]
*''[[Saskatchewan Bill of Rights]]''
▲*[[Human rights in Canada]]
==References==
Line 110 ⟶ 111:
==External links==
*[http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-12.3/FullText.html ''Canadian Bill of Rights'' (full text)]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20050504204636/http://www.canadianprisonlaw.com/misc/billofrights.htm Annotated bill of rights]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20040927181825/http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/cgi-bin/srch.pl?database=en%2Fjug Supreme Court cases which use the 1960 Bill of Rights]
Line 120 ⟶ 121:
[[Category:Human rights in Canada]]
[[Category:National human rights instruments]]
[[Category:August 1960 events in Canada]]
[[Category:1960 in Canadian politics]]
[[Category:1960 documents]]
| |||