Section 19 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Last updated

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.

Contents

Text

Section 19 reads,

19(1) Either English or French may be used by any person in, or in any pleading in or process issuing from, any court established by Parliament.
(2) Either English or French may be used by any person in, or in any pleading in or process issuing from, any court of New Brunswick.

Section 19 is based on rights in section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Section 133 provides that "either of those Languages may be used by any Person or in any Pleading or Process in or issuing from any Court of Canada established under this Act, and in or from all or any of the Courts of Quebec." However, unlike section 133, section 19(2) extends these rights to courts in New Brunswick. This was not entirely new, as section 13(1) of the Official Languages of New Brunswick Act (1973) provided for statutory language rights in New Brunswick courts. Still, the wording of section 19(2) follows section 133 more closely than section 13(1). In the 1986 Supreme Court case Société des Acadiens v. Association of Parents , Justice Jean Beetz found this to be significant. Since section 133 rights are limited, constitutional language rights in New Brunswick courts are more limited than rights under section 13(1). [1]

Section 13(1) reads,

13(1). Subject to section 15, in any proceeding before a court, any person appearing or giving evidence may be heard in the official language of his choice and such choice is not to place that person at any disadvantage.

Under section 23 of the Manitoba Act, people in Manitoba courts have rights similar to those in section 133. Hence, New Brunswick, Manitoba, and Quebec are the only provinces whose court systems constitutionally must provide such rights. [2]

Section 19(2) was controversial when the Charter was being negotiated. The Barristers' Society of New Brunswick considered the proposed provision and argued that over 90% of New Brunswick lawyers spoke only English and the section might emphasize the language of lawyers more so than their clients. [3]

Interpretation

In Société des Acadiens, Justice Beetz ruled that section 19 of the Charter and section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867 established a right to speak in either English or French. However, neither section went so far as to guarantee a person speaking in either English or French would be understood by the judge or judges. Under these sections it would be possible for a judge who understood only one of the two languages to preside over a case in which someone chose to speak the other language. Beetz did not want such a situation, however, and felt that the right to be understood was protected by basic principles of fundamental justice found in sections 7 and 14 of the Charter. Since this is a right established under fundamental justice and not the official language provisions, it was a right belonging to anyone regardless of whether they speak English, French or a non-official language. This interpretation was influenced by past interpretations of section 133, including the interpretation of similar language rights in the Parliament of Canada found in section 133 and section 17 of the Charter.

This interpretation of section 19 has been disputed. In the same case, Chief Justice Brian Dickson and Justice Bertha Wilson both found that a right to be understood by a judge regardless of whether one chooses to speak English or French could be found in the penumbra of section 19. [1] [4]

However, the restrictive interpretation of language rights in Société des Acadiens was largely overturned in R. v. Beaulac.

Related Research Articles

<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.

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 legal dispute over Quebec's language policy began soon after the enactment of Bill 101, establishing the Charter of the French Language, by the Parliament of Quebec in 1977.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Official bilingualism in Canada</span> Policy that the English and French languages have equal status and usage in Canadian government

The official languages of Canada are English and French, which "have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and Government of Canada," according to Canada's constitution. "Official bilingualism" is the term used in Canada to collectively describe the policies, constitutional provisions, and laws that ensure legal equality of English and French in the Parliament and courts of Canada, protect the linguistic rights of English- and French-speaking minorities in different provinces, and ensure a level of government services in both languages across Canada.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jean Beetz</span> Canadian judge

Jean-Marie Philémon Joseph Beetz,, c.r. was a Canadian lawyer, academic and judge from Quebec. He served as a puisne justice of the Supreme Court of Canada from 1974 to 1988.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Section 16 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</span> Official bilingualism in Canada

Section 16 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the first of several sections of the Constitution dealing with Canada's two official languages, English and French. Section 16 declares that English and French are the official languages of Canada and of the province of New Brunswick.

J. E. Michel Bastarache is a Canadian lawyer, businessman, and retired puisne justice on the Supreme Court of Canada.

Section 22 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one of several sections of the Charter relating to the official languages of Canada. The official languages, under section 16, are English and French. Section 22 is specifically concerned with political rights relating to languages besides English and French.

Section 17 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one of the provisions of the Charter that addresses rights relating to Canada's two official languages, English and French. While the section 17 right to use either language within the Parliament of Canada repeats a right already anchored in section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867, section 17 also guarantees the right to use both languages in the legislature of New Brunswick, the only officially bilingual province under section 16 of the Charter.

Section 21 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one of several sections of the Charter relating to the official languages of Canada. The official languages, under section 16 of the Charter, are English and French. Sections 16 to 20 guarantee a number of rights in regard to the use of these languages in the federal and New Brunswick courts and other government institutions. Thus, section 21 clarifies that language rights regarding English and French in the Constitution of Canada, outside the Charter, remain valid and are not limited by the language rights within the Charter.

<i>Société des Acadiens v Association of Parents</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Société des Acadiens v Association of Parents is a Supreme Court of Canada decision on minority language rights under section 19(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The majority of the Court held that in civil cases in the New Brunswick courts, the parties have the right to use either French or English in all submissions and pleadings. However, they do not have a right to have the matter heard by a judge who understands them in the language they choose to speak. It is sufficient if there is simultaneous translation. In addition to the majority decision, two other justices of the Court held that the parties did have the right to be heard and understood by the judge in the language of their choice, but on the facts of the case, that standard was met.

Jones v New Brunswick (AG) (1974), [1975] 2 S.C.R. 182 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the protection of language rights under the Canadian Constitution. The Mayor of Moncton, Leonard Jones, challenged the federal Official Languages Act, which made both French and English the official languages of the institutions of the federal government. Jones argued that the subject matter of the law fell outside the constitutional jurisdiction of the federal government.

<i>Quebec (AG) v Blaikie (No 1)</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Quebec (AG) v Blaikie , [1979] 2 S.C.R. 1016 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on language rights in the Constitution Act, 1867. The Court held that the sections of Quebec's Charter of the French Language, which required that provincial laws be enacted in French only, violated section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

Section 20 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one of the sections of the Constitution of Canada dealing with Canada's two official languages, English and French. Along with section 16, section 20 is one of the few sections under the title "Official Languages of Canada" that guarantees bilingualism outside Parliament, legislatures and courts. This also makes it more extensive than language rights in the Constitution Act, 1867. Section 20's specific function is to establish a right to English and French services from the governments of Canada and New Brunswick.

Section 18 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one of the provisions of the Constitution that addresses rights relating to Canada's two official languages, English and French. Like section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867, section 18 requires that all statutes and other records made by the Parliament of Canada must be available in both official languages. Section 133 places a similar obligation on the legislature of Quebec, and this is reaffirmed by section 21 of the Charter. Section 18 of the Charter places a similar obligation on the legislature of New Brunswick. New Brunswick is the only officially bilingual province under section 16 of the Charter.

<i>R v Beaulac</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

R v Beaulac [1999] 1 S.C.R. 768 is a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on language rights. Notably, the majority adopted a liberal and purposive interpretation of language rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, overturning conservative case law such as Société des Acadiens v. Association of Parents (1986). As the majority wrote, "To the extent that Société des Acadiens du Nouveau-Brunswick... stands for a restrictive interpretation of language rights, it is to be rejected."

<i>An Act Recognizing the Equality of the Two Official Linguistic Communities in New Brunswick</i> Provincial law in New Brunswick, Canada

The law recognising the equality of the two linguistic communities of New Brunswick, or the more succinct Law 88, is a law adopted by the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick, recognising the equality of the Anglophone and Francophone linguistic communities of the province.

Because the country contains two major language groups and numerous other linguistic minorities, in Canada official languages policy has always been an important and high-profile area of public policy.

The equal authenticity rule is a rule of judicial interpretation developed by Canadian courts as a way of interpreting laws written in parallel French and English texts. The constitution of Canada requires that both versions of each bilingual law be treated as equally authoritative, which can result in problems when the English and French versions are incongruent. The equal authenticity rule is derived from section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which states, inter alia, "The Acts of the Parliament of Canada and the Legislature of Quebec shall be printed and published in both those Languages [i.e. both English and French]."

<i>Société des Acadiens et Acadiennes du Nouveau-Brunswick Inc v Canada</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Société des Acadiens et Acadiennes du Nouveau-Brunswick Inc v Canada, 2008 SCC 15 is a Canadian constitutional law case, dealing with the language standards imposed by section 20(2) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms on the Royal Canadian Mounted Police pursuant to their duties as New Brunswick's police force.

References

  1. 1 2 Beetz J., Société des Acadiens v. Association of Parents, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 549.
  2. ↑ Peter W. Hogg, Constitutional Law of Canada, 2003 Student Ed. (Scarborough, Ontario: Thomson Canada Limited, 2003), page 1145.
  3. ↑ Bastarache, Michel, Andre Braen, Emmanuel Didier and Pierre Foucher, Language Rights in Canada, ed. Michel Bastarache, trans. Translation Devinat et Associés, Ottawa, (Montréal, Quebec: Editions Yvon Blais, 1987), p. 151.
  4. ↑ Hogg, pages 1147-1148.
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.