Essay On Foreign Law

To tell the truth, firstly, I think Canada has too many laws because of the lack of universality reflected by its laws.Nowadays, the society and also the quality of people are both developing rapidly day by day.However, from a deeper point of view, we could easily seek out the truth under the “peaceful” and “harmonious” surface of the modern

There are higher courts assuring that the judges follow the law at all times. The Canadian Charter of rights gives us our rights and freedoms so people will have their rights protected while in court. A part of democracy is everyone having their rights and this advantage of an independent justice system ensures citizens that they will have them. The rights of the people need to be protected and with higher courts ensuring that they are creating an equal and secure justice system. People will not be afraid to go to court or unsure if their rights apply during the trial. The promise of rights and freedoms is not a threat to democracy, especially if it is helpful and provides for each citizen across Canada. In fact, it also forces judges to be under a law since they are people too. They are not the law, they just enforce it and this rule guarantees that a judge cannot just do whatever they feel like doing and give out unfair sentences or wrong decisions. This provides Canada with a democracy and no threat towards

Now that you are up to date with currents events I will briefly touch on some strong point of the Canadian democratic system. Citizens in Canada indirectly hold power in a free electoral system and are given better representation and more freedoms for their citizens than other systems of government. The freedom of speech, freedom of political expression, and the freedom of the media allow citizens to vote in favour of their own interest. Democracy in Canada is rooted on the grounds of equal rights; this gives people equality before the law, human rights, free and fair elections and so on. In comparison to the Third World, power is in the hands of the “Big Men”, the police and army are the ones who hold control not the people and where corruption is a norm, Canada may look like a utopia. Another strong point in the Canadian political system is everyone no matter race or sex has the right to vote as long as you are a Canadian citizen over the age of eighteen. Until the 60s/70s parties would make up electoral boundaries this was done to increase the number of votes in that location this is called gerrymander, this was unfair because certain parties had an advantage over others. However, now under the Electoral Boundaries Commissions this problem does not occur and no party has the upper hand over another. Interestingly the

The entrenchment of rights in the Canadian Constitution comes after long experience with a system of parliamentary supremacy. The American judicial tradition of treating the written constitution as fundamental law cannot have an instant Canadian counterpart. Thus, it does not follow that the Canadian courts will necessarily claim a role comparable to that of courts in the United States, nor is it clear that the representative bodies in Canada would tolerate such a judicial assertion of power. Opposition by government bodies to the Charter have already occurred in Canada, where the Parti Quebecois government of Quebec invoked the “notwithstanding the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms” clause for the purpose of protecting their language laws from attack under the charter. This report will attempt to note some of the common and distinctive features of the text of the two constitutions as well as to how they differ.

Canada's Justice System It’s a common belief that western nations believe that their own justice system is blind, and that all people are equal before the eyes of the law. Whether or not that’s true is an entirely different scenario. Canadians take pride in our open mind approach to and acceptance of all cultures, multiculturalism is what makes this Canada so unique and great.

Since the British North America Act was adopted in 1867, Canada has been developing and writing up their own laws independently from other countries. Many people believe that, though our Canadian laws have come far from the days of the BNA act, they are still not up to par with the harshness of American laws. The advantage that Canadians have over Americans is that in Canada, there is only one criminal code for all Canadians whereas in the United States, every State has their own criminal codes which, unfortunately for the Americans, are not identical. Also, the United States and Canada each have a law that is fraught with the possibility that an injustice will be brought upon those whom these laws apply. In the United States, it is the

In contrast to the Canadian parliamentary system, which has remained fairly static and unchanged since Victorian times, the Canadian legal system has undergone a tremendous evolution over the last century and a half. When looking at Canadian history in depth one discovers the repeated movement to take power from the superiors or the overruling and place it into the palms of the people. As seen through examples our western law (canadian law) has slowly branched off from the supremacy of God (mosaic law), to the supremacy of the monarchy (bristish law), finally to a realization of the importance of citizen participation in the creating, governing, and administrating of the laws (Greek law).

“Canada seems to believe that the melting pot approach is one of the better solutions to fit their legal system. “From a cultural perspective, the Canadian legal system takes the `melting pot' approach, which is to say that culturally unique methods of dispute resolu- tion are not accepted by our legal system. Instead, our legal system imposes its values on

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is an important milestone in Canadian history. An effort through rigorous debate and compromise gave birth to this document that defines our collective values and principles by guaranteeing and protecting the fundamental rights of its citizens. Prior to the Charter, there was no gurantee in Canada that rights and freedoms would not be taken away by legislation. The Charter also allows courts to render the constitutional duty so that any decisions made are consistent with those rights and freedoms. The Charter was established firmly in “The Constitution Act, 1982”, with the declaration of this act Canada escaped from the severe practice of concept of parliamentary supremacy. The Charter has an enormous effect on court’s decision power to award justice to important and debatable issues about policies that affect public. In awarding the verdict courts are not even reluctant to rewrite laws that violate the testament of the Charter. The judges have a duty to regulate the rulings of both provincial and federal governments which, disagree with the root value of Charter.

Canada has become a country where laws such as: assisted suicide, prostitution, and abortion are becoming easily altered by higher powers; the power of the judges. Canadian judges are changing certain laws that affect the quality of living. The question comes down to who is truly in charge of law making in Canada? The government may make the laws, but judges may reject and change the entirety laws through the use of the entrenchment of the Charter. Additionally, judicial supremacy retains their power through a paradoxical parliamentary supremacy. Furthermore appointing government officials and electing government officials plays a tremendous part in correlations to Canadian democracy. To summarize, judiciary are too powerful through the entrenchment

In common law, judges interpret the law and judge apply it based on precedent from previous cases; compared to civil law which focuses on written legislature. In Canada, judges are given the chance to be activists. If a judge believes a citizen’s rights, under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, are being violated, they are given the power to rule against the unconstitutional law made by the elected branches of government; this concept is referred to as judicial activism (Hausegger, Hennigar, & Riddell, 2015, p. 123). Judicial activism ensures the individual rights of each person are upheld, but the concept is controversial. Judicial activism is problematic because it awards an authoritarian level of power to unelected judges, which goes against Canada’s democratic ideology where elected officials decide and vote on the laws (Cameron, 2009, p. 27). I argue that judicial activism should not be a part of Canada’s judicial process because it gives too much power to the courts and disrupts the democratic process of

The Canadian Justice system has existed since the 17th century and many laws have been removed and changed because our ideas of crime evolve through time. An act I believe should be criminalized is the institution of puppy mills and decriminalized is the usage of heroine.

We believe that our judicial system does not support the rights guaranteed in Canadian charter rights and freedom and focus on legal guilt over factual guilt. The Canadian court system sentencing procedure see’ over both sides of the story carefully but court focus on proving suspect guilt rather then innocence. Our judicial systems currently have many flaws and it’s clearly noticeable in some situations. There have been a lot of cases where our judicial system failed to provide justice to the victim or guaranteed rights to society. Our main law that has been compromised in years is the privacy law. Fifteen years ago privacy was not as important as it today, the main reason for that is technology. As science advance it came up with all these new gadgets such as cell, computer and tables and with all technology came the rise social media. We now have Facebook, Twitter, Istagram, and many more online social media sites that people uses. Our law says that all of our private information cannot be disclosed to government unless someone is a threat but these rights have been violated multiple times. The first time it was an issue was in G20 summit, June 2010. Lately is have also been an issue in Canadian spy companies. Also government recently passed the bill c-150, which clearly violates our charter rights.

Since the birth of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms there is growing scrutiny of the Supreme Court of Canada’s role in the intertwinement law and politics. Individuals are noting that courts under judicial review have the capacity to shape law to meet the evolving needs of society (Sharpe, 2003:1). This paper will analyze the emerging issues witnessed in the study of Canada’s judiciary system. The first issue being explored is the concept of “Judicial Activism”. This paper defines “Judicial Activism” with accordance to Britannica Encyclopaedia online as being a phenomenon in which judges take a direct policy-making role, and seem more than willing to strike down legislative or executive actions. (Roosevelt, 2015:1).

Throughout the United States there are many different laws among the fifty states that make up this union. The laws are different throughout the states because of the need of the laws. Living in one state and not having the advantages or disadvantages of a law in another state would not be that unfair or unequal. This is true because if you don’t like a law in your state you could always fight it and try to change it or you could always move out of that state and go to one that has the laws that you like.