R. V. Hauser Case Study

1686 Words 7 Pages
While studying the case R. v Hauser, it is clear to see why it is known to be one of the leading constitutional decisions in understanding the workings of Peace, order and good governments in relation to a power struggle of jurisdiction. The whole case surrounds the question on whether the Attorney General, or the Attorney General of Canada should have the power to control the prosecution under the Federal Narcotics Control Act. It is a battle for powers of jurisdiction in regards to the criminal code, and more so the Narcotics Control Act; (NCA), 1961. The Narcotics Act was once Canada’s national drug control statue prior to its repeal in 1996 where the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act took its place. The NCA upheld an international treaty which prohibited the production, and supply of specific drugs; normally narcotics, unless given a licence for specific …show more content…
Much controversy surrounds this case and the verdict given is subject to much criticism, especially seeing that one of the Justices involved had been seen saying “the majority judgment in the Hauser case ought not to have placed the Narcotic Control Act under the residuary power" and that he would have viewed "the Narcotic Control Act as an exercise of the criminal law power." , which contradicts the verdict given. The issues surrounding when and where the provincial level of government holds power over criminal cases and where the federal government does, has created much confusion. All in which will be discussed throughout this case commentary. Despite the controversy presented this case study will provide a thorough understanding of the logistics behind R. v Hauser by delving into various doctrines relating to the case such as the Narcotics Control Act,BNA act, along with an analysis of the verdict to give a great understanding on all surrounding issues relating to this

Related Documents