The supreme court of Canada exists to provide an unbiased body ensuring that the laws of the land uphold the rights and freedoms of the Charter. Though the Supreme Court acts as a system of checks and balances on the executive power of Canada, at what point does the system of the court give the judiciary too great a level of power? When acknowledging the constitutions and legislature in which the Supreme Court justices gain and hold their power, s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the lack of equal representation in the court, it is indisputable that the highest court in Canada is overly powerful. It is evident through the examination of court rulings and the systemic practices of the judiciary that the Supreme Court of
…show more content…
1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms essentially gives the Supreme Court the power to modify or remove legislation in the event that it is deemed arbitrary. The fact that a body not elected by the public has the power to strike down democratically made law shows that the power of the Supreme Court is too great. This is shown in Insite v. Canada when a safe injection site in B.C wanted to continue practising when the democratically elected government deemed their practice illegal. It was deemed illegal because the site would not only be in possession of illegal substances but would also promote possession and trafficing. Insite argued that s. 1 allowed them an exemption from sections 4 and 5 of the Controlled Drug and Substance Act. They argued that the addicts right to safety and life was more important than the illegality of their actions. By ruling in favour of Insite, the Supreme Court not only modified the legislation’s decision against Insite but also modified the Controlled Drug and Substance Act that had been put in place by the government to protect people.They overstepped their bounds allowing the needs of the few to outweigh the needs of the many. Their job is to check the government if what they do is unjust, but how is protecting the majority …show more content…
The British North America Act, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms have created a situation in which the legislation to protect the people from the power of the Court is muddled down, and what is left is an oligarchy of people from one singular ethnic background and very similar socializations. The ability of the Court to strike-down legislation written by a democratically elected commons defies the will of the people. Thus subjecting them to live by what another body believes ought to be morally and legally right, showing that this institution challenges the democratic values of Canada, and is operating with an excessive amount of
1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms essentially gives the Supreme Court the power to modify or remove legislation in the event that it is deemed arbitrary. The fact that a body not elected by the public has the power to strike down democratically made law shows that the power of the Supreme Court is too great. This is shown in Insite v. Canada when a safe injection site in B.C wanted to continue practising when the democratically elected government deemed their practice illegal. It was deemed illegal because the site would not only be in possession of illegal substances but would also promote possession and trafficing. Insite argued that s. 1 allowed them an exemption from sections 4 and 5 of the Controlled Drug and Substance Act. They argued that the addicts right to safety and life was more important than the illegality of their actions. By ruling in favour of Insite, the Supreme Court not only modified the legislation’s decision against Insite but also modified the Controlled Drug and Substance Act that had been put in place by the government to protect people.They overstepped their bounds allowing the needs of the few to outweigh the needs of the many. Their job is to check the government if what they do is unjust, but how is protecting the majority …show more content…
The British North America Act, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms have created a situation in which the legislation to protect the people from the power of the Court is muddled down, and what is left is an oligarchy of people from one singular ethnic background and very similar socializations. The ability of the Court to strike-down legislation written by a democratically elected commons defies the will of the people. Thus subjecting them to live by what another body believes ought to be morally and legally right, showing that this institution challenges the democratic values of Canada, and is operating with an excessive amount of