The Constitutional Development Of Canada

“The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed from without. It has to come from within”. (Gandhi) A lawful and fair democracy is one that represents the people, where the will of the people is done not where the government’s will is enforced. Here in Canada we believe a democratic government is well suited for its people but like any other system it has its flaws. This country was a model democracy. Canada’s wealth, respect for legal, human and civil rights almost promises that this country has the potential to uphold a legitimate democracy. Reading headlines today concerning the state of democracy in Canada we can see how our political system is slipping. A democracy should uphold the rights of its people rather than the rights of a

The Government of Canada has designed several laws, programs, and services to promote safety and prevent workplace accidents; they include the Occupational Health & Safety Act, The Labour Program, the Canada Labour Code, and the Centre for Occupational Health and Safety.

The Manitoba Act said that Manitoba could send in 4 member to the House Of Commons and 2 members into the Senate. It also declared that 560 000 hectares of land would be kept for the Metis families and that of people could use French or English in schools and government.

The Canadian constitution is one founded on the idea of responsible government. This is a principle that is meant to hold the state. However, many have since struggled with understanding how the Monarch of Britain fits into this form of governance. Some say the monarch is meant to be the representation of the state, and the figurehead we need to keep our government in check. Others point out that the Monarch is an unelected official incompatible with the ideas of responsible government and democracy, for that matter. Scholars seem evenly split between both camps. A question must be proposed about these opinion however, is the Monarchy harmful enough to Canadian society to spend the time, money, and effort to overhaul our constitution? It shouldn’t have to be stated but abolishing the monarchy is no easy task, so to even undertake this measure, we as a society must be absolutely sure of the decision and the consequences Advocates of monarchy are expressing their support for the institution on nostalgic grounds,

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 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has made some controversial decisions in key cases in Canada’s past. When looking at the Canadian Founders intent for Canadian Federalism, many scholars argue that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has done a bad job following the founders’ intentions and intentionally decentralized Canada. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council did fail in keeping in line with what the founders intended for Canada and may have even intentionally set out to decentralize the Canadian government, but this does not mean it had a negative impact on Canada. There are a number of cases that were seen by the JCPC that played a vital role in the decentralization of the Canadian government, yet

In order to bring these often very abstract issues to life, we will examine a selection of high profile and prominent decisions (mainly from Canadian courts, and frequently from the Supreme Court of Canada) which can be said to have changed the law, and in which the judges of the court have disagreed among themselves. Cases to be covered concern controversial issues such as Battered Woman Syndrome, Euthanasia/ Physician Assisted Suicide, Hate Speech, Marijuana Use, Obscenity/ Pornography, Prostitution, or topics in human rights (i.e., freedom of expression, national security and the right not to be tortured, or religious freedom). Analysis of cases will include exploration and examination of the philosophical aspects of crucial terms and concepts that appear in Canadian law, such as in the Criminal Code of Canada, or in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Statute of Westminister allowed Canada to make their own laws and regulations. Britain couldn’t rule Canada, but the Privy Council in Britain is still higher than Supreme Court of Canada. The document was signed in Britain, since Canada was still part of British Empire at the time. British Empire passed the Statute of Westminister on Dec. 11, 1931 and Canada gained complete independence. This Statute effected not only Canada but five more dominions, the Commonwealth of Australia, the Irish Free State, the Dominion of Newfoundland, the Dominion of New Zealand, and the Union of South Africa.

A great Prime Minister should always do what is right for Canada, no matter what obstacle he or she faces. Pierre Elliot Trudeau was undeniably one of Canada's most influential people due to his effort to change our country by creating the Official Language Act, establishing the Charter Rights and Freedom within Canada's constitution and by invoking the War Measures Act during October 1970 Crisis. He achieved many goals he had set for himself which he achieved later on through his years in office.

Canada adopted the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms after Pierre Trudeau's ideology, work and effort of a Canadian Constitution and for constitutional rights and freedoms. Trudeau was a patriot and believed in an independent nation. He wished for Canada to have its own identity and therefore helped pass the Constitution Act of 1982. The legislation went through long political and legal battles, but, Trudeau was able to make the legislation into effect. Queen Elizabeth II, signed the legislation and officially made it law. Moreover, the constitution was consisted of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Consequently all people in Canada had fundamental rights and freedoms. This included freedom of expression, the right to a democratic government, mobility rights, the legal rights of people accused of crime and many more rights we now take for granted. These rights made Canada a democratic nation and helped form it into one of the best places to live. In addition, Trudeau included homosexuality, abortion, religious and indigenous rights. He decriminalized homsexuality, liberalized divorce law, legalized contraception, legalized abortion and also created The Rights Of Indigenous People of Canada. He included rights for all individuals, for individuals to be treated equally. At the time, many disagreed on homosexuality, abortion, contraception and providing Indigenous people with specialized rights to

When Rome was establishing their legal system they came up with twelve laws for all citizens to follow. Eventually, Canada used this same idea of coming up with laws to cover all crimes or incidents that could possibly happen. Along with the laws, both societies created different consequences for each law if they happened to be broken. When a law was broken the accused must be tried at the courthouse, and  prove whether or not they are guilty. Before the Romans convicted someone of a crime they would try the person in front of a jury in the court. Eventually Canadians also used this method when trying to create a final verdict. Canadians have improved on the legal system, but it is thanks to the Romans for the structure of

A number of issues plague the current state of Canadian democracy, such as poor voter turnout, the increasing polarization of politics, and even numerous scandals regarding the Senate. Yet, arguably the most important issue in relation to the Canadian electoral process is the debate over whether or not the state should implement electoral reform for federal elections, more specifically replacing the Single Member Plurality system (SMP) with the Mixed Member Proportional system (MMP). Some analysts, like Christopher Kam, defend the SMP system and claim that a number of the issues that are used as the basis for the support of MMP are actually the result of larger forces than simply the electoral format. And, that holding politicians

The birth of Canada was unlike other nations; it wasn’t achieved by war or revolution. There were leading causes for confederation both inside and outside of Canada. Internal

The Constitutional Act of 1791 and Québec Act of 1774 created two provinces, which were known as Upper and Lower Canada. They were separated into two different provinces because of British and French laws (Since France used to own the place). When this happened each "province" was given its own Legislative Assembly, Legislative Council, Executive Council, and Lieutenant Governor.. The new Constitution also gave women, aboriginals, Jews, and Catholics the right to vote. British Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger stated that the Canadians would be masters of their own destinies, but that experience would teach them that English laws were best, but as was the custom in Great Britain, the right to vote was only granted to landowners; English

Canada is a North American Country having 10 provinces & 3 territories in its content. It is located to the