Preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Last updated

The preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the introductory sentence to the Constitution of Canada's Charter of Rights and Constitution Act, 1982 . In full, it reads, "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law".

Contents

Interpretation

Writing in 1982, when the Charter came into force, constitutional scholar Peter Hogg noted that these words, being a preamble are limited in some direct applications of the law but can help to determine how other sections of the Charter should be read and applied. In this particular case, however, Hogg expressed concern as to how much help this preamble could be, noting the term "rule of law" is "notoriously vague" and that the mention of the "supremacy of God" can be considered in some contexts as contrary to section 2 of the Charter, which protects freedom of conscience, which Hogg felt would include a right to atheism. [1] In R v Morgentaler (1988), Justice Bertha Wilson defined freedom of conscience as protecting "conscientious beliefs which are not religiously motivated", and balanced the preamble out with the statement that "the values entrenched in the Charter are those which characterize a free and democratic society".

In considering the legal implications of the preamble in the 1999 case R v Sharpe , the British Columbia Court of Appeal referred to it as a "dead letter" which the BC justices had "no authority to breathe life" into. [2]

The Supreme Court did consider the preamble's mention of the rule of law in Reference Re Manitoba Language Rights (1985), noting that striking down most of Manitoba's laws as unconstitutional (because they were not enacted in both languages as required by the Manitoba Act ) might be a threat to the rule of law. This would render Manitoba nearly lawless, and the principle of the rule of law was defined as meaning no one is above the law and that laws must exist, as they uphold society's values. The court therefore confirmed the Charter's preamble's importance by stating, "The constitutional status of the rule of law is beyond question." [3] Consequently, some time was given before the unconstitutional laws would expire.

In Re BC Motor Vehicle Act (1985), the Supreme Court also linked the rule of law to the principles of fundamental justice, as illustrated by sections 8 to 14 of the Charter. The court noted the importance of these rights to the justice system, stating that sections 8 to 14 "have been recognized as essential elements of a system for the administration of justice which is founded upon a belief in 'the dignity and worth of the human person' (preamble to the Canadian Bill of Rights, R.S.C. 1970, App. III) and on "the rule of law" (preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms)." [4]

Alternate interpretations

Some theologians and philosophers have questioned whether the preamble refers to a specific God (the Christian God or Jewish God) or to a more abstract concept that promotes civic virtue (i.e., civil religion). [2] For instance, Paul Russell has stated that "The basic problem with the God-clause is that it runs into an impossible dilemma, given the actual content of the Charter itself. More specifically, what it claims is either meaningless (and therefore worthless), or it has real meaning, in which case it strikes a blow against the very principles that the Charter is in place to protect (in which case it is pernicious)". [5] In R v Big M Drug Mart Ltd , a dissenting judge on the Alberta Court of Appeal, Justice Belzil, wrote that the preamble to the Charter indicated Canada had a Christian heritage and thus courts should not use the section 2 right to freedom of religion to eliminate traditions of this heritage.

History

New Democratic MP Svend Robinson has opposed the preamble's mention of God. Svend Robinson.jpg
New Democratic MP Svend Robinson has opposed the preamble's mention of God.

After one version of the Charter drawn in June 1980 that lasted until September, which said in its preamble that Canadians "shall always be, with the help of God, a free and self-governing people", [6] the Charter was not going to have a preamble. The current preamble only first appeared in the April 1981 draft, which came relatively late in the process. It was included despite the fact there was no call for the Charter to have a preamble by the Special Joint Committee which was reviewing the Constitution, [1] and that according to George Egerton, then Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, called it "strange" that some of his colleagues wanted God referenced in the Charter. (Trudeau told his MPs, "I don't think God gives a damn whether he's in the constitution or not.") However, there were various religious and Conservative criticisms of the Charter during its drafting, with fears that denominational schools and Canada's abortion law were threatened. Also at this time, religious groups in Canada such as "100 Huntley Street" and the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada were growing and wanted God acknowledged in the Constitution. Despite the Liberal Party of Canada's protests that a better preamble could be written after patriation was achieved and that therefore there was no need for the preamble being proposed at the time by the Conservatives, religious groups increased their activism. Trudeau's justice minister, Jean Chrétien, said it was the top issue in all of the letters the government was sent during patriation. [6]

The preamble has been politically controversial: in 1999, New Democratic MP Svend Robinson, presented a petition created by members of Humanist Canada in the House of Commons that the reference to God be struck from the preamble, citing concerns about Canada's diversity and those Canadians who did not believe in God. [7] The proposal was controversial and the party responded by undermining Robinson's responsibilities and his position in the caucus.[ citation needed ]

Societal impact

The preamble has proved valuable to some groups and political parties. The Christian Heritage Party of Canada, for example, quoted the preamble on the main page of their website, and the party called itself "Canada's only pro-Life, pro-family federal political party, and the only federal party that endorses the principles of the Preamble to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms". [8] The words "principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law" also appear in the party's official policies regarding what they feel all laws should be based upon, and the party states, "'Human rights' as expressed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms can only, therefore, be legitimately interpreted in light of, or in conjunction with, the higher Moral Law of God." [9]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Canada</span> Principles, institutions and law of political governance in Canada

The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law in Canada. It outlines Canada's system of government and the civil and human rights of those who are citizens of Canada and non-citizens in Canada. Its contents are an amalgamation of various codified acts, treaties between the Crown and Indigenous Peoples, uncodified traditions and conventions. Canada is one of the oldest constitutional monarchies in the world.

<i>Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</i> 1982 Canadian constitutional legislation

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, often simply referred to as the Charter in Canada, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all governments in Canada. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was proclaimed in force by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, as part of the Constitution Act, 1982.

In Canadian and New Zealand law, fundamental justice is the fairness underlying the administration of justice and its operation. The principles of fundamental justice are specific legal principles that command "significant societal consensus" as "fundamental to the way in which the legal system ought fairly to operate", per R v Malmo-Levine. These principles may stipulate basic procedural rights afforded to anyone facing an adjudicative process or procedure that affects fundamental rights and freedoms, and certain substantive standards related to the rule of law that regulate the actions of the state.

The Implied Bill of Rights is a judicial theory in Canadian jurisprudence that recognizes that certain basic principles are underlying the Constitution of Canada.

<i>Canadian Bill of Rights</i>

The Canadian Bill of Rights is a federal statute and bill of rights enacted by the Parliament of Canada on August 10, 1960. It provides Canadians with certain rights at Canadian federal law in relation to other federal statutes. It was the earliest expression of human rights law at the federal level in Canada, though an implied Bill of Rights had already been recognized in the Canadian common law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canada Act 1982</span> Canadian constitutional enactment

The Canada Act 1982 is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom and one of the enactments which make up the Constitution of Canada. It was enacted at the request of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada to patriate Canada's constitution, ending the power of the British Parliament to amend the constitution. The act also formally ended the "request and consent" provisions of the Statute of Westminster 1931 in relation to Canada, whereby the British parliament had a general power to pass laws extending to Canada at its own request.

The Constitution Act, 1982 is a part of the Constitution of Canada. The Act was introduced as part of Canada's process of patriating the constitution, introducing several amendments to the British North America Act, 1867, including re-naming it the Constitution Act, 1867. In addition to patriating the Constitution, the Constitution Act, 1982 enacted the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; guaranteed rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada; provided for future constitutional conferences; and set out the procedures for amending the Constitution in the future.

The Victoria Charter was a set of proposed amendments to the Constitution of Canada in 1971. This document represented a failed attempt on the part of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau to patriate the Constitution, add a bill of rights to it and entrench English and French as Canada's official languages; he later succeeded in all these objectives in 1982 with the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982.

Patriation is the political process that led to full Canadian sovereignty, culminating with the Constitution Act, 1982. The process was necessary because, at the time, under the Statute of Westminster, 1931, and with Canada's agreement, the British Parliament retained the power to amend Canada's British North America Acts and to enact, more generally, for Canada at the request and with the consent of the Dominion. That authority was removed from the UK by the enactment of the Canada Act, 1982, on March 29, 1982, by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, as requested by the Parliament of Canada.

<i>Constitution Act, 1867</i> Primary constitutional document of Canada

The Constitution Act, 1867, originally enacted as the British North America Act, 1867, is a major part of the Constitution of Canada. The act created a federal dominion and defines much of the operation of the Government of Canada, including its federal structure, the House of Commons, the Senate, the justice system, and the taxation system. In 1982, with the patriation of the Constitution, the British North America Acts which were originally enacted by the British Parliament, including this Act, were renamed. However, the acts are still known by their original names in records of the United Kingdom. Amendments were also made at this time: section 92A was added, giving provinces greater control over non-renewable natural resources.

Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the section that confirms that the rights listed in the Charter are guaranteed. The section is also known as the reasonable limits clause or limitations clause, as it legally allows the government to limit an individual's Charter rights. This limitation on rights has been used in the last twenty years to prevent a variety of objectionable conduct such as child pornography, hate speech, and obscenity.

Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ("Charter") is the section of the Constitution of Canada that lists what the Charter calls "fundamental freedoms" theoretically applying to everyone in Canada, regardless of whether they are a Canadian citizen, or an individual or corporation. These freedoms can be held against actions of all levels of government and are enforceable by the courts. The fundamental freedoms are freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of belief, freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of religion in Canada</span> Overview of religious freedom in Canada

Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally protected right, allowing believers the freedom to assemble and worship without limitation or interference.

Section 26 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, like other provisions within the section 25 to 31 bloc, provides a guide in interpreting how the Charter should affect Canadian society. The section's particular role is to address rights not covered by or mentioned in the Charter.

Section 31 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a part of the Constitution of Canada, which clarifies that the Charter does not increase the powers of either the federal government or the legislatures of the provinces of Canada. As a result, only the courts may enforce the rights in the Charter.

<i>Reference re Remuneration of Judges of the Provincial Court</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

The Reference re Remuneration of Judges of the Provincial Court (P.E.I.) [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3 is a leading opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada in response to a reference question regarding remuneration and the independence and impartiality of provincial court judges. Notably, the majority opinion found all judges are independent, not just superior court judges and inferior court judges concerned with criminal law, as the written constitution stipulates. Unwritten constitutional principles were relied upon to demonstrate this, indicating such principles were growing in importance in constitutional interpretation. The reference also remains one of the most definitive statements on the extent to which all judges in Canada are protected by the Constitution.

Section 19 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one of the provisions of the Constitution of Canada that addresses rights relating to Canada's two official languages, English and French. Like section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867, section 19 allows anyone to speak English or French in federal courts. However, only section 133 extends these rights to Quebec courts, while section 19 extends these rights to courts in New Brunswick. New Brunswick is the only officially bilingual province under section 16 of the Charter.

Preamble to the <i>Constitution Act, 1867</i> Provision of the Constitution of Canada

The Preamble to the Constitution Act, 1867 is a provision of the Constitution of Canada, setting out some of the general goals and principles of the Act. Although not itself a substantive provision, the courts have used it as a guide to the interpretation of the Constitution of Canada, particularly unwritten constitutional principles which inform the history and meaning of the Constitution.

<i>Succession to the Throne Act, 2013</i> Canadian statute changing royal succession

The Succession to the Throne Act, 2013, which has the long title An Act to Assent to Alterations in the Law Touching the Succession to the Throne, was passed by the Parliament of Canada to give assent to the Succession to the Crown Bill, which was intended to change the line of succession to the British throne and was passed with amendments by the UK Parliament on 25 April 2013. Bill C-53 was presented and received its first reading in the House of Commons on 31 January 2013 and received royal assent on 27 March of the same year. The act was brought into force by the Governor General-in-Council on 26 March 2015.

References

  1. 1 2 Hogg, Peter W. Canada Act 1982 Annotated. Toronto: Carswell Company, 1982.
  2. 1 2 Farrow, Douglas. "Of Secularity and Civil Religion." In Recognizing Religion in a Secular Society: Essays in Pluralism, Religion, and Public Policy. Ed. Douglas Farrow. McGill-Queen's University Press, 2004.
  3. ↑ Reference re Manitoba Language Rights pages 747-750.
  4. ↑ Re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486 at para. 30.
  5. ↑ Paul, Russell. "The supremacy of God does not belong in the Constitution", The Globe & Mail, June 11, 1999.
  6. 1 2 Egerton, George. "Trudeau, God, and the Canadian Constitution: Religion, Human Rights, and Government Authority in the Making of the 1982 Constitution." In Rethinking Church, State, and Modernity: Canada between Europe and America. Eds. Daniel Lyon and Marguerite Van Die. University of Toronto Press.
  7. ↑ Svend Robinson, Member of Parliament for Burnaby—Douglas (June 8, 1999). "THE CONSTITUTION" (PDF). Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) . Canada: House of Commons. p. 3.
  8. ↑ "Welcome to Our Website". Christian Heritage Party of Canada. Archived from the original on 2 April 2006. Retrieved 2 April 2006.
  9. ↑ "7. CIVIL GOVERNMENT". Christian Heritage Party of Canada. Archived from the original on 25 May 2007.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.