Case Study Of S. 1 Of The Canadian Charter Of Rights And Freedoms

Improved Essays
The laws that are at issue in this case are S.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which 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. Sections 3 of the Charter which states that every Canadian citizen has the right to vote. Section 52(1) of the Charter which states that the Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. Also the main law that is at issue is S.51(e) of the Canadian Elections Act. In the hierarchy of law, sections 1,3, and 52(1) of the Charter apply to constitutional law. The reason these three sections apply to constitutional law is because they are in the Charter of rights and freedoms, which is under the constitution. Section 51(e) of the Canadian Elections Act applies to statute law. The reason section 51(e) applies to statute law is because the Canadian Elections Act was made by the Federal government of Canada. Since the Attorney General has the burden to prove that S.51(e) of the Canadian Elections Act has a good objective, the Attorney General must have three objectives to prove this. …show more content…
The Attorney General argued that these three objectives justified the infringement of prisoners’ right to vote : 1. to affirm and maintain the sanctity of voting in our democracy 2. to preserve the integrity of the voting process 3. to penalize offenders for the crimes that have committed 3. The courts had responded to each of these objectives separately, for the first objective the court said that the symbolic and abstract nature of the first objective reduces it as a jurisdiction for violating a constitutional right that everyone in Canada has. In addition the slow process toward universal suffrage means that it is doubtful that anybody can be denied their right to vote based on the premises that they are not decent people. The second objective according to the court is equally unacceptable because there is no reason to believe that inmates do not have access to these ideas. In addition, the taking advantage of ideas is not a prerequisite for the right to vote. Furthermore the prisons should ensure conditions are as compatible as possible with the right to vote. The third objective which was penalizing offenders for the crimes that they have committed, was also insufficient according to the court. The reason is because if it is meant to impose punishment on the prisoners, it is already punishment for being incarcerated not for committing a crime. The intent to punish serious offenders denial of the right to vote to only those imprisoned is both over and under inclusive. In conclusion the objectives presented by the Attorney General are unacceptable, and insufficiently important. 4. In my opinion after reading about Sauve’s struggle to get prisoners their right to vote, I believe that prisoners should have the right to vote. There are three reasons why I believe prisoners should vote, the act of voting emphasizes the value of order and rule of law. It would allow prisoners to be integrated into society, and finally not allowing prisoners to vote would change democracy and change the way democracy works. The act of voting would emphasize the value of order and rule of law. There are three important principles to rule of law. 1. General recognition that the law is necessary in an orderly society. 2. The law apples to everyone, no one is above the law. 3. A person right cannot be taken away in accordance to the law. Therefore allowing prisoners to utilize their right to vote, would allow them to help influence the law and policies about prisons and society in a constructive manner. Also it would be consistent with the rule of law, since as they are still Canadian citizens they have their right to vote. In addition, if we do not allow prisoners to vote we are sending them a message that they aren't part of society and they should remain alienated. Therefore allowing them to

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Firstly, the political impact this case had was can a provincial act over reach their boundaries and maybe even frustrate parliament and get away with it? The case stated that the decision made by the judges favored s.6 of the provincial act over s.30 of the federal act because it fufilled the purpose more than s. 30. It led to many questions raised in this case, in whereby how far can provinces can enact their regulations in so far it does not frustrate the federal enactment. The doctrine of paramountcy is one of great complexity and requires a great analysis in truly to understand it, especially when bringing it up to court. It requires knowledge about both provincial and federal powers.…

    • 2032 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Clark, Joe. “What’s Right and Wrong with Democracy in Canada.” Election Law Journal 3, No. 3 (2004). http://journals 2.scholarsportal.info.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/pdf/13510347/v16i0003/485_poppsatsodr.xml. Joe Clark provides a few reasons for why he thinks Canada is not a strong democracy.…

    • 828 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Canadian Charter Preamble

    • 978 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom states, “Canada is grounded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God” (Russell 1999). According to Russell (1999), this can also be considered the “God-clause.” The three articles discuss this notion of stating “the supremacy of God” in the preamble of the Canadian Charter. Although the articles have different views about the preamble, I highly agree with Russell’s (1999) article titled, “The Supremacy of God does not belong in the Constitution”. To begin with, Russell’s (1999) overall argument is that ‘God’ should not be mentioned in the preamble of the Canadian Charter.…

    • 978 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Felon disenfranchisement is a common practice in the United States and occurs when incarcerated felons and ex-felons are denied certain rights, specifically their right to vote. Felonies vary between violent and nonviolent crimes and are considered to be more serious than misdemeanors. Depending on the crime and the state, conviction of a felony can lead to a minimum of one year in prison. Despite the crime and conviction, the question of whether or not an incarcerated felon or ex-felon has the right to vote is important to examine. While felon disenfranchisement laws are left to be decided by each individual state, the Supreme Court has upheld the view that felon disenfranchisement is constitutional yet has not provided a justification for…

    • 647 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In a Democracy it is important to have frequent elections where all adults have the availability to participate. Until recent history the United States had mechanism put in place where some groups of society had multiple obstacles. Mechanisms like poll tax and literacy tests were given to reduce the number of minority voters. Individuals were even disfranchised and had no capability to vote. Devices and mechanisms able to break the burden of disfranchisement had first began in 1965 when a group of peaceful marchers traveled to Selma, Alabama, to the state capital of Montgomery to push and promote legislation for the creation of new voting rights legislation.…

    • 908 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Felon disenfranchisement has been in practice for centuries, dating back to colonial times (Carter 45). It has been a very controversial topic that is still debated today due to morals and legal understandings. President Jimmy Carter defined disenfranchisement as denying a person the right to vote. Therefore, felon disenfranchisement refers to depriving felons their right to vote, at least temporarily (Carter 45). The United States Constitution and its interpretation has been a key aspect that is considered in determining one’s opinion on felons’ voting rights.…

    • 907 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    The British North America Act, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms have created a situation in which the legislation to protect the people from the power of the Court is muddled down, and what is left is an oligarchy of people from one singular ethnic background and very similar socializations. The ability of the Court to strike-down legislation written by a democratically elected commons defies the will of the people. Thus subjecting them to live by what another body believes ought to be morally and legally right, showing that this institution challenges the democratic values of Canada, and is operating with an excessive amount of…

    • 1470 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Question 1 A. 370 U.S. 660: Robinson v. California (No. 554) Argued: April 17, 1962- Decided: June 25, 1962 The case involved Robinson and the state of California. He had violated Californian statute that prohibited addiction to narcotics (Uscourtsgov, 2018). The statute termed it a misdemeanor punishable by any person arrested with addiction to drugs, and, sustained the petitioner’s imprisonment thereunder the Californian courts. The constitutional amendments that were under scrutiny, in this case, were Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments Pp.…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees civil rights to everyone in Canada and was designed to unify Canadians. The Charter was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982 along with the rest of the Act. “However, the Bill of Rights is only a federal statute, rather than a constitutional document.” (Wikipedia 04/06/15)…

    • 205 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The entrenchment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and its relation to democracy in Canada has been at the core of many debates throughout the years. A democratic government is one that allows the people to have a direct hand in what goes on in their country and some believe that entrenching the charter of rights in the constitution is a violation of the principles of this democracy. Although the charter of rights is entrenched, the charter of rights is very abstract in its rules and allows for flexibility when decisions are made. Adding to this, section 1 and 33 of the charter of rights is explicit in overcoming the argument that the entrenchment of the charter of rights violates any principles of democracy. Throughout my essay, I will argue…

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Essay On Mandatory Voting

    • 831 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Participation in Politics: Is Compulsory Voting the Answer to Low Voter Turnout? Every few years, the concept of compulsory or mandatory voting appears on United States politicians’ radar as a solution to increasing voter turnout. Following the 2014 midterm elections, when only 33.9 percent of eligible voters cast ballots, President Obama threatened to make voting compulsory via an executive order (DelReal). This announcement by the president brought the idea to the forefront of American politics once again, and constitutional scholars quickly responded, claiming compulsory voting laws violate the rights of United States citizens (von Spakovsky).…

    • 831 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    No people in the United States rely more on the federal government than those who are housed by it, fed by it, employed by it, and barred from voting to change it. These people are incarcerated felons, and their disenfranchisement is a barrier to democracy and dialogue in America. According to The Sentencing Project, felony convictions have stripped 6.1 million Americans of the right to vote, enough to swing the popular vote in five of the last seven presidential elections. Of those disenfranchised, 35% are black, an extreme overrepresentation of African-Americans, who make up only 13% of the U.S. population.…

    • 598 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms can be seen as all-encompassing, and yet, it does not dictate the rules to follow regarding a major component of each person’s life: employment. Or does it? A vast portion of our lives in Canada is spent working, and regardless of the work environment, we interact with other people who may or may not come from the same backgrounds and ideologies as we do. With no specific terminology in the Charter that includes employment law, we must look between the lines and find the connections that lay within. The Charter provides the roadmap for Canadian principles and social values; it lays out the rights and freedoms we have as a people, and promotes the protection of those human rights through its laws.…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Brilliant Essays

    Blum, Edward. The Unintended Consequences of Section 5 of the Voting Rights . Washington, D.C.: AEI Press, 2007. 88. Print. 4.…

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Brilliant Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Prisoners should also have a right Are felons considered part of society? Even though no one has considered prisoners, they are around and make up our country. “Our system for making political decisions in this country, is being distorted by the miscounting of two million people.” That is a large amount people not having their voice heard.…

    • 1007 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays