Reconciling Rights and Federalism during Review of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms: The Supreme Court of Canada and the Centralization Thesis, 1982 to 1999
Year:
2001
Author :
Volume and number:
, 34
Collection:
, 2
Journal:
, Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique
Pages :
, 321-355
Abstract
Cet article étudie la relation entre les droits garantis par la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés et le fédéralisme afin de vérifier si les normes pan-canadiennes imposées par la Cour suprême du Canada dans des champs de juridiction des provinces compromettent l'autonomie de ces dernières. Il soutient que la thèse selon laquelle le contrôle de la constitutionnalité des lois sur la base des principes de la Charte a un effet centralisateur n'est pas concluante, puisqu'elle amalgame plusieurs processus différents et dénature l'impact de la Charte sur le fédéralisme canadien et l'autonomie des provinces. Il montre, en outre, que l'évaluation de la conformité des lois avec les principes constitutionnels de la Charte a affaiblit l'influence de cette thèse et révélé que son explication de la relation entre les droits et le fédéralisme, au Canada, était limitée et insuffisante. Plus concrètement, il indique que les décisions rendues par la Cour Suprême du Canada ont démontré que cette institution était sensible au fédéralisme et que la Charte n'entravait pas l'autonomie des provinces comme le prétend la thèse sur la centralisation. Cette jurisprudence peut être subdivisée ties: une défense du fédéralisme en tant que gardien du partage des compétences, une défense explicite du fédéralisme et une défense implicite du fédéralisme, qui est surtout évidente au niveau de la relation entre les droits des criminels et la responsabilité des provinces en matière d'administration de la justice. Cet article démontre que, dans ses jugements sur le respect de la Charte, la Cour suprême a privilégié une approche qui réconcilie les droits fondamentaux et le fédéralisme, ce dont témoignent le déclin de la thèse sur la centralisation et l'importance grandissante de la jurisprudence tripartite dans le domaine du contrôle de l'application des principes de la Charte. Cette sensibilité de la Cour suprême au fédéralisme s'est manifestée dés le début du processus de revision de la constitutionnalité des lois en regard de la Charte, mais elle a été largement occultée par la prédominance de la thèse sur la centralisation dans les débats sur les effets de la Charte.
This article considers the relationship between rights and federalism in the Supreme Court of Canada's review of cases invoking the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It considers whether the Supreme Court of Canada has compromised provincial autonomy by establishing Canada-wide standards in provincial areas of jurisdiction. It suggests that the centralization thesis associated with judicial review on Charter grounds is inconclusive, and combining several processes under the rubric of centralization, it misrepresents the Charter's effect on Canadian federalism and provincial autonomy. Further, the centralization thesis has lost much momentum during the course of Charter review, and, as a result, is a limited approach to understanding the relationship between rights and federalism in Canada. Specifically, the Supreme Court of Canada has demonstrated sensitivity to federalism in its Charter jurisprudence, most evident in a complex jurisprudence that has served to offset the centralization thesis and its implications for provincial autonomy. This three‐ part federalism jurisprudence is federalism as gatekeeper, an explicit federalism jurisprudence and an implicit federalism jurisprudence, which is most evident in the relationship between criminal rights and provincial responsibility for the administration of justice. This article demonstrates that the Court's approach to Charter review has seen a reconciliation between rights and federalism, most evident in the declining importance of the centralization thesis and the growing importance of the three-part federalism jurisprudence during Charter review. This sensitivity to federalism has existed since the beginning of the Court's Charter jurisprudence but has largely been overshadowed by the dominance of the centralization thesis in the Charter debate.
This article considers the relationship between rights and federalism in the Supreme Court of Canada's review of cases invoking the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It considers whether the Supreme Court of Canada has compromised provincial autonomy by establishing Canada-wide standards in provincial areas of jurisdiction. It suggests that the centralization thesis associated with judicial review on Charter grounds is inconclusive, and combining several processes under the rubric of centralization, it misrepresents the Charter's effect on Canadian federalism and provincial autonomy. Further, the centralization thesis has lost much momentum during the course of Charter review, and, as a result, is a limited approach to understanding the relationship between rights and federalism in Canada. Specifically, the Supreme Court of Canada has demonstrated sensitivity to federalism in its Charter jurisprudence, most evident in a complex jurisprudence that has served to offset the centralization thesis and its implications for provincial autonomy. This three‐ part federalism jurisprudence is federalism as gatekeeper, an explicit federalism jurisprudence and an implicit federalism jurisprudence, which is most evident in the relationship between criminal rights and provincial responsibility for the administration of justice. This article demonstrates that the Court's approach to Charter review has seen a reconciliation between rights and federalism, most evident in the declining importance of the centralization thesis and the growing importance of the three-part federalism jurisprudence during Charter review. This sensitivity to federalism has existed since the beginning of the Court's Charter jurisprudence but has largely been overshadowed by the dominance of the centralization thesis in the Charter debate.
Theme :
Right
Database: This is a bibliographic reference. Please note that the majority of references in our database do not contain full texts.
- To consult references on the health of official‑language minority communities (OLMC): click here