Driedger's 'Modern Principle' at the Supreme Court of Canada: Interpretation, Justification, Legitimization

Un résumé en français est également disponible

Regulatory History Material as an Extrinsic Aid to Interpretation: An Empirical Study on the Use of RIAS by the Federal Court of Canada

Since 1986, the Canadian Public Administration is required to analyze the socio-economic impact of new regulatory requirements or regulatory changes. To report on its analysis, a Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) is produced and published in the Canada Gazette with the proposed regulation to which it pertains for notice to, and comments by, interested parties. After the allocated time for comments has elapsed, the regulation is adopted with a final version of the RIAS. Both documents are again published in the Canada Gazette. As a result, the RIAS acquires the status of an official public document of the Government of Canada and its content can be argued in courts as an extrinsic aid to the interpretation of a regulation. In this paper, an analysis of empirical findings on the uses of this interpretative tool by the Federal Court of Canada is made. A sample of decisions classified as unorthodox show that judges are making determinations on the basis of two distinct sets of arguments built from the information found in a RIAS and which the author calls “technocratic” and “democratic”. The author argues that these uses raise the general question of “What makes law possible in our contemporary legal systems”? for they underline enduring legal problems pertaining to the knowledge and the acceptance of the law by the governed. She concludes that this new interpretive trend of making technocratic and democratic uses of a RIAS in case law should be monitored closely as it may signal a greater change than foreseen, and perhaps an unwanted one, regarding the relationship between the government and the judiciary.

"Breaking the Silence: International conference on the Indian residential schools commission of Canada" ; "Briser le silence: Colloque international sur la commission de vérité et de réconciliation sur les pensionnats indiens".

This is the full audio recording of the "Breaking the silence : International conference on the Indian residential schools commission of Canada" that took place at the University of Montreal on September 26-27, 2008. Enregistrement audio complets du colloque "Briser le silence" sur la Commission de vérité et de réconciliation sur les pensionnats indiens, ayant eu lieu à Montréal les 26 et 27 septembre 2008.

The Supreme Court of Canada Ruling in Carter v. Canada: A New Era of End-of-Life Care for Canadians

La tribune de l'éditeur / Editor's Soapbox

Reforming the Division of Powers in Canada : An (Un)achievable Endeavour?

Formal amendments to the division of powers provisions of Canada's 1867 federal constitution have always proved difficult to achieve. However, since 1982, this task has become hopelessly unachievable. Modifications to, and adaptation of, the division of power has consequently been left to judges called upon to interpret sections 91 to 95 of the Constitution Act, 1867, and to executives officers of the central and regional governments as they negotiate intergovernmental agreements. The end result of theses two processes has been highly favourable to the central government. Courts have given a liberal interpretation to the central government's exclusive fields of jurisdiction. Moreover, the latter's spending power, unobstructed by the fragile legal framwork imposed under interprovincial agreements, has enabled it to encroach upon the exclusive heads of power of the provinces. As we will see, one of the main reason behind the Canadian constitutional stalemate, and for the recurrent isolation of Quebec - even where informal modification are concerned - is the different conceptions of Canadian federalism respectively held by Quebecers and by English Canadian.

Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada: An Ethical Analysis of Conscientious and Religious Objections

Article

The Supreme Court’s Understanding of Federalism: Efficiency at the Expense of Diversity

This paper is an examination of the Supreme Court of Canada's interpretation of federalism since constitutional repatriation in 1982. It argues that the lure of centralist efficiency is overpowering a fundamentally important part of our federal order: regionalism. The author contends that changes made by the Court to certain fundamental concepts of Canadian constitutional law now provide Parliament with greater latitude than before in the exercise of its legislative powers. According to the author, these changes are disturbing because they are structured so as to preclude consideration of the legitimate concerns of regional polities. Furthermore, he argues that the Court has reinforced the central government's power to regulate the economy, including intraprovincial matters affecting trade, by resorting to highly functional tests that emphasize economic efficiency over other criteria. This, he claims, makes it more difficult to invoke legitimate regional interests that would lead to duplication, overlapping and even, in the eyes of some, inefficiency. The author the focuses on the Court's treatment of environmental protection in an attempt to show the tension between the Court's desire to use a functional approach and the need to recognize regional interests. Finally, through an examination of recent case law, he attemps to demonstrate that the Court's dominant perspective remains functional despite its endorsement of a more community-oriented undestanding of federalism in Secession Reference. If the Court chooses to proceed in this manner, it will alienate regional polities and may encourage them to choose more radical means of asserting their differences. Further, the author argues that strict adherence to the functional effectiveness approach will undermine the very values that federalism is meant to promote.

Impoverishment of The Law by The Law: A Critique of The Attorney General's Vision of The Rule of Law and The Federal Principle

This brief article is devoted to a critique of the arguments put forward by the Attorney General of Canada in connection with the Reference concerning certain questions relating to the secession of Quebec (hereinafter, "the Reference"). This critique will not be presented from a plainly positivist standpoint. On the contrary, I will be examining in particular (1) how the approach taken by the Attorney General impoverished the legal concepts of the rule of law anf federalism, both of which were, however, central to her submission; and, in a more general way, (2) how the excessively detailed analysis of constitutional texts contributes to the impoverishment of the symbolic function of the law, however essential that dimension may be to its legitimacy. My criticism will take into account the reasons for judgement delivered recently by the Supreme Court in the Reference.

The Secession Reference: A Ruling in Search of a Nation

This short article will address the two following issues: the new vision of the Canadian constitutional order entertained by the Supreme Court in the Reference re Secession of Quebec (I) nd the impact of this new vision. upon the fate of Canada (II)

The Credibility and Authoritativeness of Documentary Information in Determining Refugee Status: The Canadian Experience

This article reviews the origins of the Documentation, Information and Research Branch (the 'Documentation Center') of Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB), established in 1988 as a part of a major revision of the procedure for determination of refugee status. The Documentation Center conducts research to produce documents describing conditions in refugee-producing countries, and also disseminates information from outside. The information is available to decision-makers, IRB staff, counsel and claimants. Given the importance of decisions on refugee status, the article looks at the credibility and the authoritativeness of the information, by analyzing the structure of information used. It recalls the different types of information 'package' produced, such as a country profiles and the Question and Answer Series, the Weekly Madia Review, the 'Perspectives' series, Responses to Information Requests and Country files, and considers the trend towards standardization across the country. The research process is reviewed, as are the hiring criteria for researchers, the composition of the 'collection', how acquisitions are made, and the development of databases, particularly on country of origin (human rights material) and legal information, which are accessible on-line. The author examines how documentary information can be used by decision-makers to draw conclusions as to whether the claim has a credible basis or the claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution. Relevant caselaw is available to assess and weigh the claim. The experience of Amnesty International in similar work is cited for comparative purposes. A number of 'safeguards' are mentioned, which contribute to the goal of impartiality in research, or which otherwise enhance the credibility of the information, and the author suggests that guidelines might be drafted to explain and assist in the realization of these aims. Greater resources might also enable the Center to undertake the task of 'certifying' the authoritativeness of sources. The author concludes that, as a new institution in Canadian administrative law, the Documentation Center opens interesting avenues for the future. Beacause it ensures an acceptable degree of impartiality of its research and the documents it produces, it may be a useful model for others tribunals adjudicating in fields where evidence is either difficult to gather, or is otherwise complex.

De la consultation des peuples autochtones : structure institutionnelle d'un dialogue appelé à renouveler la notion des droits ancestraux : essai fondé sur la jurisprudence de la Cour suprême du Canada (1984-2004) et la théorie du droit

Le présent mémoire est consacré à l'étude de l'obligation faite à l'État canadien de consulter les autochtones lorsqu'il envisage de prendre des mesures portant atteinte à leurs droits et intérêts. On s'y interroge sur le sens que peut avoir cette obligation, si elle n'inclut pas celle de s'entendre avec les autochtones. Notre étude retrace d'abord l'évolution de l'obligation de consulter dans la jurisprudence de la Cour suprême du Canada, pour se pencher ensuite sur l'élaboration d'un modèle théorique du processus consultatif. En observant la manière dont la jurisprudence relative aux droits ancestraux a donné naissance à l'obligation de consulter, on constate que c'est en s'approchant au plus près de l'idée d'autonomie gouvernementale autochtone - soit en définissant le titre ancestral, droit autochtone à la terre elle-même - que la Cour a senti le besoin de développer la consultation en tant que véritable outil de dialogue entre l'État et les Premières nations. Or, pour assurer la participation réelle des parties au processus de consultation, la Cour a ensuite dû balancer leur rapport de forces, ce qu'elle a fait en admettant le manque de légitimité du pouvoir étatique sur les autochtones. C'est ainsi qu'après avoir donné naissance au processus de consultation, la jurisprudence relative aux droits ancestraux pourrait à son tour être modifiée substantiellement par son entremise. En effet, l'égalité qu'il commande remet en question l'approche culturaliste de la Cour aux droits ancestraux, et pourrait l'amener à refonder ces droits dans le principe plus égalitaire de continuité des ordres juridiques autochtones. Contrairement à l'approche culturaliste actuelle, ce principe fait place à la reconnaissance juridique de l'autonomie gouvernementale autochtone. La logique interne égalitaire du processus de consultation ayant ainsi été exposée, elle fait ensuite l'objet d'une plus ample analyse. On se demande d'abord comment concevoir cette logique sur le plan théorique. Ceci exige d'ancrer la consultation, en tant qu'institution juridique, dans une certaine vision du droit. Nous adoptons ici celle de Lon Fuller, riche de sens pour nos fins. Puis, nous explicitons les principes structurants du processus consultatif. Il appert de cette réflexion que l'effectivité de la consultation dépend de la qualité du dialogue qu'elle engendre entre les parties. Si elle respecte sa morale inhérente, la consultation peut générer une relation morale unique entre les autochtones et l'État canadien. Cette relation de reconnaissance mutuelle est une relation de don.

Pour une constitutionnalisation du droit à la sécession au Canada

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de maîtrise en droit, option recherche (LL.M.)"

Fédéralisme, concurrence intergouvernementale et intérêt national dans le domaine des valeurs mobilières au Canada

La structure de la réglementation des valeurs mobilières au Canada fait périodiquement l'objet d'un débat public et une des questions sous-jacentes est celle du partage des compétences législatives prévu par la Constitution canadienne. Le débat a été relancé en 2003 par la recommandation d'un comité de personnes averties de centraliser cette réglementation au fédéral. Les provinces, sauf l'Ontario, demeurent opposées à l'idée, préférant plutôt l'harmonisation réglementaire. Pour alléger le fardeau réglementaire des émetteurs, elles tentent également de mettre en oeuvre un « régime de passeport ». Ce débat présente la question comme un jeu à somme nulle, occultant ainsi certains principes fondamentaux du fédéralisme: innovation provinciale dans une union économique nationale. Dans ce mémoire, nous proposons donc une structure réglementaire, basée sur la théorie de la concurrence intergouvernementale, qui s'harmonise avec les compétences du gouvernement fédéral et des provinces tout en optimisant leurs atouts respectifs.