International Covenant On Civil And Political Rights

The most famous and tallest elf of all is Buddy Hobbs, the main character of the classic Christmas movie, "Elf," which is also one of the films that companies me through the cold holiday break. The film talks about a normal baby boy accidently got taken to North Pole after Santa finished delivering all the gifts. He ended up living there and became one of the elves. However when he grown up, finally discovers that he doesn't belong there and have decided to go on his search to reunite with his real family. On his journey, I can see hope, love, lots of sweet bubbly energy, and also the great joy of Christmas.

The film Elf (Berg et al., 2003) follows the adventures of Buddy, a human adopted into Elf culture, as he journeys from the North Pole to find his human father in New York City. As an orphan waiting to be adopted, Buddy was accidentally taken to the North Pole in Santa’s sack. Buddy grew up immersed in the Elf culture and way of life, and was not told of his human origins until he was well into adulthood. Upon learning this, Buddy travels to New York City to find his birth father Walter, a grinch-like publisher at a children’s book company. Unwelcomed by his father, Buddy befriends Walter’s son Michael and begins to make a life in New York, dating a shy, Elf-portraying department store employee named Jovie.

Many Canadians of the 21st century still often wonder, was the creation of the Charter of Rights & Freedoms a mistake? It is believed that the Charter 's creation was a significant benefit as it guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all areas and levels of government. However, many believe the Charter makes Canada more like the United States, especially by serving corporate rights and individual rights rather than group rights and social rights. Also, there are several rights that should be included in the Charter, such as a right to health care and a basic right to free education. With this, by guaranteeing certain political rights and civil rights to every Canadian citizen, it is evident that the creation of the Charter of Rights & Freedoms was not a mistake, and was truly a benefit to all Canadian citizens for many important reasons. One important reason is that Charter guarantees all Canadians their legal rights as it promises rights of people in dealing with the justice system and law enforcement are protected. In addition with the guarantee of Canadians legal rights, is their language rights which is to assure people have the right to use either the English or French language in communications with Canada 's federal government and certain provincial governments. As well as guaranteeing all Canadian 's equality rights to promise equal treatment before and under the law. The

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights which is a part of the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part of the 1982 Constitution Act. In general, it guarantees Canadian citizens and residents fundamental freedoms, democratic rights, mobility rights, legal rights and equality rights within reasonable limits. The Constitution Act (1982), of which included the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was pushed by Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau in 1980 in order to enact the British North America Act (1867) as well as the Bill of Rights (1960). The enactment of the British North America Act would have allowed Canada to have its constitution completely independent of Britain; in response to the 1980 Quebec Referendum.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms was constructed to replace the Bill of Rights, 1960. In the 1960’s-1970’s Quebec was extremely discontent with being apart of Canada due to the language barer and being a minority. Many citizens in Quebec even wanted to separate themselves from Canada and form their own nation. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau decided that the new charter in order to ensure the rights of people residing in Quebec. In order to do this Trudeau had to create an amending formula for the British North-American Act. This would grand Canada its independence from Brittan. After gaining independence Pierre Trudeau also included the new Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This charter created a great amount a controversy among many

This essay will argue the reasons behind the notwithstanding clause remaining within the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In this paper, I will provide reasons as to why the clause should be kept within the Charter beginning with the arguments that it is an essential element in critical policy decisions being made by politicians and it 's hard to remove which requires the amending formula to be used if changes are to be made. On the other side, its use in policy can create grave and problematic judicial activism in the eyes of those who oppose it. In the next few paragraphs, I will define my terms, introduce a brief history of the charter and the notwithstanding clause and describe the positions from both sides regarding its use,

The Canadian constitution is the foundation that forms and brings together our nation government and its legal system. You can also consider the constitution as a rulebook. It contains rules and regulations that political parties must follow in order to adopt, amend, or revoke a law. The constitution has three main sources. In 1867 the British North American Act passed, which was the first source of the constitution. A change was made to the BNA act and was patriated in 1982. It was then officially called the Constitution Act 1867. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were included in the amendments that were added to the Constitution in 1982. The act was renamed Constitution Act 1982. The second source is the unwritten set of rules and conventions, which is crucial in Canadian law. These rules usually are developed and later on used by important politicians and government officials. The last source of the constitution is the court rulings and decisions. When there are disputes or conflicts to solve, the courts are called upon to resolve them. The charter of rights and freedoms is known as the most important piece of paperwork to any living Canadian. (Alexandraowicz 104). It is made up of 34 sections and 9 subsections. The most significant subtopics in the charter are our fundamental freedoms, legal and equality rights. These rights allow us to speak and do as we will under a reasonable limit, protect us under the law, treat us fairly,

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights granted constitutional status that was introduced in the Constitution Act of 1982 by Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. The Constitution Act is also known as the repatriation of the Canadian Constitution. The Charter had several purposes; the first is “to outline and guarantee the political rights of Canadian citizens, as well as the civil rights of anyone who is residing on the territory of Canada” (The Canadian Charter. 1). Secondly, “It balances the rights of legislatures and courts through the ‘notwithstanding’ clause, which gives the federal and provincial parliaments limited powers to override court decisions “, while section 2 of the bill enshrines the freedom of the press, allowing the media to release controversial reports without fear of the state (Ibbitson. 2012). thirdly, it criminalized discrimination in society, government rulings and the judicial system and provides a set of ethical principles for all Canadians to follow, while promoting equality throughout the country.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has significantly enhanced the power of the judiciary in Canada. Within the Supreme Court of Canada judges have been given the judiciary power and this amount of power is not excessive. Again, in the Supreme Court of Canada judges are federally appointed. Most of these appointments are made by the minister of Justice after Cabinet consultation and approval. In some other cases, appointments are made by the Prime Minister.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of Canada’s written constitution called the Constitution Act in 1982 it was the second main aspect of the Act and it guaranteed fundamental, democratic, legal, egalitarian, and linguistic rights and freedoms against government intrusion, it imposed formal new limitations on the governments in interaction with its citizens. The charter has made society more equitable for visible minorities through its use of its Fundamental Rights and Freedoms and Section 15 which say that every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of law without discrimination, but does the Charter really represent Canada’s egalitarian society or are we just saying we care without actually taking action. In this paper it will be shown that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has not made Canadian society more equitable and will discuss the right side and the left side of the debate, while agreeing with the left sided critiques. The right winged perspective on the Charter argues that the groups are not seeking equality, but, instead, are asking judges to grant them political advantages through favorable Charter decisions ( Smithey, S. I., 2001, p. 2) while the left winged perspective is the Charter not only does not go far enough, but actually retards egalitarian progress in Canada and that the Charter is essentially a classically liberal document designed to constrain state action rather than to require the

The phenomenon of entrenching the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not new to Canadian citizens, but it is a notion that is perceived in several ways. Many view it as a feature that disregards the fundamental right to democracy, an integral part of Canada’s political system. A functioning democracy is an important factor in providing citizens with the utmost rights and freedoms deserved. Society’s full potential is not being achieved if there are individuals who believe their principle of democracy is being violated. This violation nonetheless, true or not, should not be ignored.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of the Constitution and it was added to the Constitution in 1982. The Constitution has many laws about the essential guidelines one must follow in our country. It also governs how the government/ organizations should treat their citizens. The Charter allows the citizens and newcomers to feel like they are appreciated and also safe. However, there are situations where the Charter cannot protect you. The Charter can be stretched and can be looked at from different perspectives which is why these cases are very controversial. In Canada, we have many levels of courts so if someone was rejected by a lower court, they can appeal to a higher one. Cases that include an individual that feels as if their rights haven’t been respected take months because the appeal to present their case in front of a higher court can take weeks. It is the understanding of the individual that the if he/she brings a case to the court, they will win because courts are equal and unbiased but when that is not always the case. There are many cases when the judge cannot decide because both the challenger and the law are correct. In today’s society, equality issues are ever growing, these cases are brought based on section 15 of the charter that promises Canadians are fair and equal trial regardless of the differences. Decisions are very tough, so they are usually made on the grounds of evidence, statutes and precedent cases.

Since the creation of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 7 has had a brilliant and vital lifespan. Furthermore, cases such as Carter have shown the brilliance and significance of the section in preserving the rights of Canadians. In this essay, I will be discussing section 7 of the Charter, and constructing an argument as to why the section still has its flaws. Thus, although section 7 of the Charter has had an illustrious career, it is still prone to issues that are based upon it being limited to violations that are in accordance with “fundamental justice”. To accomplish the task at hand; I shall firstly, introduce section 7 and also introduce the broad legal and social issue at hand, while also presenting the cases that I will be exploring throughout the essay. Secondly, I shall analyze section 7 on the basis of the research completed by scholars, media reports, and other relevant research materials. Furthermore, I will demonstrate as to how this research has assisted in analyzing and contextualizing the cases I’ve identified. Lastly, I shall conclude by discussing further questions I would like to pursue in the future, and the direction I will take with this.

Almost everyone knows sweatshops are not acceptable places to work or support. Sweatshops, per definition from the International Labor Organization are organizations that violate more than two labor laws (Venkidaslam). There are several arguments against sweatshops. First, is that these organizations exploit their workers. They provide them low wages and some pay below the minimum wage of the home nation. Moreover, these workers are forced to work more than 60 hours per week and are mandated to work overtime. In addition, workers are subjected to unsafe environments and sexual abuse. Finally, sweatshops are known for their child labor, where children below the legal working age are paid extremely small wages. Anyone who is against sweatshops will say, choosing to partner with these organizations are unethical.

From the past, education has always been seen as a crucial aspect of our lives. In 1968, Durkheim stated that ‘society can survive only if there exists among its members a sufficient degree of homogeneity; education perpetuates and reinforces this homogeneity by fixing in the child, from the beginning, the essential similarities that collective life demands.’ Education has become even more indispensable as more instruments start to recognise the right to education. For instance, Article 2 of the First Protocol (A2P1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 28(1) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. This essay will assess the effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) in protecting the right to education in England. It is noted that the HRA 1998 provide a relatively limited protection as compared to the rest of the instruments. But looking in light of the proposed reform on HRA 1998, the current protection provided by the HRA 1998 has undeniably secured certain protections toward the children’s educational rights. Firstly, this essay looks into the scope of protections that are provided by the HRA 1998. Secondly, the effectiveness of A2P1. Thirdly, the influence of other conventions with regards to the right to education. Lastly, the essay will conclude by looking at the future reform of the HRA 1998.