Canada Charter Of Rights

More than 30 years ago today, one of the most significant developments in the protection of human rights in Canada was signed and entrenched in the Canadian Constitution under the leadership of then Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. Coming into force on April 17, 1982, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the most visible and recognized part of the Canadian Constitution and is intended to protect certain political and civil rights of people in Canada from the policies and actions of all levels of government. Since its enactment in 1982, the Charter has had a powerful influence on Canadian federalism, while also communicating true independence from the former British colony. The introduction of the Charter of Rights has undoubtedly assisted Canadians
Opportunities for legal action by equality-seeking groups have grown since the Charter was introduced and generated an increase in human rights cases reaching the courts. The success rate also experienced an increase of 52% from 15% preceding the Charter as opposed to solely under the Canadian Bill of Rights, but declined gradually in the subsequent years. Possibilities were created for individuals to challenge government actions that they felt infringed upon their rights and interests as demonstrated by supporters of Aboriginal rights in 1982 as a historical turning point was achieved with the addition of the Charter. Section 35 of the Charter provides constitutional protection to the aboriginal and treaty rights of Aboriginal peoples in Canada, which increased the prospect of Aboriginal peoples claim to entailed rights previously negated. The charter's recognition of Aboriginal Peoples sent a very important message as it imposed on governments a duty to consult aboriginal peoples when resource development and other government changes affect them unjustifiably. While it does not give native groups an absolute veto on these changes, it does ensure they will be able to participate in the
The main issue that arises from an inflated judiciary role is that the Charter is anything but self-executing, meaning it is open to much interpretation. It is full of vaguely worded rights and the social science evidence that courts have at their disposal in adjudicating Charter claims is anything but determinative. As a result, judicial decisions interpreting and applying the Charter are bound to be controversial as reasonable people can and do disagree about the interpretation and application of the Charter rights, so do reasonable judges, as evident by the number of closely divided decisions in the Supreme Court. As the Charter has elevated the role of the courts by allowing judges to make sweeping social and legal changes through their interpretation of the Charter's meaning, critics say this has diminished the supremacy of elected bodies such as Parliament and the legislatures, by giving courts the power to dismiss their decisions. Alternatively, others argue the Charter has initiated a "dialogue" between Parliament and the courts, with judges striking down laws where necessary which allows Parliament and legislatures to rewrite those laws in ways that are compliant with the Charter.