Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Canadian citizen charter of rights and freedoms
Canadian citizen charter of rights and freedoms
Canadian charter of rights and freedoms essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Canadian citizen charter of rights and freedoms
While fighting the war against terrorism, though it may be challenging, societies should place the utmost value upon human rights even if that means undermining one’s counter terrorism policy. Along with a terrorist attack comes prejudice and discrimination towards those of similar nationality or religion as the attackers out of fear of another attack. A challenge for liberal democracies such as Canada is creating an effective policy in order to constrain potential terrorist attacks that is also abiding one’s individual rights that come as a part of residing in a democratic society. Difficulty comes when one is suspected of terrorism and is detained without charge. Being held without charge, specifically in Canada, violates one’s right to not be arbitrarily detained. As well, one has the right to be informed of what they are being charged for, as well as being released if the detention is unlawful (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982). Within national policies, it is unclear if abiding ones individual rights outweighs the potential of a possible terrorist attack. There is a fine distinction between reasonable measures of terrorist prevention and discrimination of certain groups of people, and that fine line has yet to be democratically agreed upon. Not only is it a challenge in the ways which a state would approach the prevention of a potential terrorist attack, but also the concept of terrorism is an extremely difficult term to define universally.
Before the upsurge of counter terrorism measures after the bombings of 9/11, a 1984 New York Times article defined terrorism as attacks of a political nature that were not harming political figures themselves, but civilians that have no connection with political conflict of an...
... middle of paper ...
...(2006, Oct 25). Anti-terror law suffers new setback: Definition of terrorism violates charter: Judge. National Post. Retrieved from
Masilamani, L. (2013). Readings for political science 100. (2 ed., p. 67). Boston, MA: Pearson. http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/docview/330657363?accountid=13800 Opoku, E. B. (2011). Human rights violations under the guise of counter-terrorism measures: A question of reconciling security concerns and protecting the fundamental right to life.
(Order No. MR77065, Queen's University (Canada)). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 142. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/docview/1008917223?accountid=13800
Rubin, A. P. (1984, Jul 28). A definition that fits terrorism anywhere. New York Times (1923-Current
File). Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/docview/122496308?accountid=13800
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has long been the legal document that protects Canadian citizens from infringements made by unscrupulous politicians and legislators. However, there are questions explored about the Sections of the Charter and in those of Section 7 in particular. This is because of the protective function of Section 7 and its obligations of the protection of a citizen’s rights to life, liberty and security of the person. There are third parties that could be posing “threats” to Charter interests and therefore the extents of Section 7 in terms of its protective function for individuals’ rights are put into question. Section 7 of the Charter says that “[E]veryone has the right to life, liberty and the security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.” The meaning of Section 7 is to adhere to each individual’s right to the sanctity of life, their physical liberty in a narrow sense, and the integrity of the person is to be kept secure. However, what would the extent of Section 7 be or moreover, what is the extent of each protected interest? The objective of this paper is to examine the extents of Section 7 of the Charter in which the focus is on the protected interests of life, liberty and security of the person. Each protected interest will be discussed in depth with its relationship to a specific Canadian court case. This will help to determine the extent of Section 7 and therefore help understand how much the Charter protects the freedom of Canadian citizens. For right to life, the First Nation communities in Canada had ‘high risk’ of threats to health in their water systems according to Health Canada. The focus of this topic...
Dye, Thomas R., L. Tucker Gibson, Jr., and Clay Robison. Politics in America. Ninth ed. Vol. 2. New York, NY: Longman, 2011. 337. Print.
Categorical terrorism, according to Jeff Goodwin, is defined as “the strategic use of violence and threats of violence, usually intended to influence several audiences, by oppositional political groups against civilian or noncombatants who belong to a specific entity, religious or national group, social class or some other collectivity, without regard to their individual identities or roles.” More so, in terms of definition, according to a study done by Jeffrey Record in 2003, there was a count of over 109 definitions of terrorism, covering 22 different categorical elements. During the 70s and 80s, the United Nations struggled to define the term, finally coming up with the following definition: “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.”
September 11, 2001 was one of the most devastating and horrific events in the United States history. Americans feeling of a secure nation had been broken. Over 3,000 people and more than 400 police officers and firefighters were killed during the attacks on The World Trade Center and the Pentagon; in New York City and Washington, D.C. Today the term terrorism is known as the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives (Birzer, Roberson). This term was clearly not defined for the United States for we had partial knowledge and experience with terrorist attacks; until the day September 11, 2001. At that time, President George W. Bush, stated over a televised address from the Oval Office, “Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.” President Bush stood by this statement for the United States was about to retaliate and change the face of the criminal justice system for terrorism.
The Canadian Criminal Justice System is, for the most part, reflective of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and various Supreme Court of Canada case-law. Everyone who finds themselves on the opposing end of the Criminal Justice System is entitled to certain protections every step of the way, beginning even before the arrest; laws protect us from unreasonable investigative techniques, guarantee certain rights at point of arrest, and provide us with the right to counsel. The bail court departs from the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ standard in that the crown only needs to prove on a balance of probabilities (Kellough, 1996, p. 175) in order to take away a person’s freedom. It is for this reason I decided to limit the scope of my observations to the bail court. What I found is a systemic evidence of a two-tier justice system. In this essay, I will outline the roles of the 'regular players' of the bail court and demonstrate how the current bail process essentially transforms the Canadian Criminal Justice System into a two-tier system where the affluent and powerful are able to receive preferential treatment over the poor.
On September 11, 2001, our country was hit with enormous devastation, just after eight o’clock a.m. the first of the twin towers was struck by a suicide pilot, the second was struck slightly later. The towers fell just after ten o’clock a.m., devastating the entire country, and ruining the lives of many. A plane also hit the Pentagon in Washington D.C., and another in rural Pennsylvania causing just as much grief. The U.S. is still in mourning, but standing tall, more Americans showed their American pride in the following months than ever before. In the months to come the only thing that was on the minds of millions was: Should we go to war? War is necessary for the survival of our country. Going to war with Iraq is a fight against terrorism. Many people believed that going to war with Iraq is unjust. Some believe that there are other ways in looking at the situation.
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2004. Romance, Joseph. Political Science 6 class lectures. Drew University, Summer 2004.
Anand, A. (2011). Combating terrorist financing: Is Canada’s legal regime effective? University of Toronto Law Journal, 61(1), 59-71. Retrieved from http://library.mtroyal.ca:2078/journals/university_of_toronto_law_journal/v061/61.1.anand.html
Dye, Thomas R. , L. Tucker Gibson Jr., and Clay Robinson. Politics In America. Brief Texas Edition ed. New Jersey: Pearson, 2005.
Larry Johnston (2008) Politics: An Introduction to the Modern Democratic State, Third Edition, Chapters 2, 3, 7, 8 and 9.
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines terrorism as “the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal” (“Terrorism”). Terrorism is a problem that all countries should be concerned with. Canada has been one of the countries that are concerned with the safety of people against terrorist attacks. Canada is very concerned with the issue of terrorism, it has a very specific position of counter-terrorism, it believes that violent extremists are the leading cause of terrorism, it has ways that the international community should respond, and it is willing to contribute to make the problem of terrorism end.
Herman, E. & Sullivan, G. O.1989. The Terrorism Industry: The Experts and Institutions That Shape Our View of Terror. New York: Pantheon.
The threat of global terrorism continues to rise with the total number of deaths reaching 32,685 in 2015, which is an 80 percent increase from 2014 (Global Index). With this said, terrorism remains a growing, and violent phenomenon that has dominated global debates. However, ‘terrorism’ remains a highly contested term; there is no global agreement on exactly what constitutes a terror act. An even more contested concept is whether to broaden the scope of terrorism to include non-state and state actors.
The concept of terrorism is exceedingly difficult to define. Author Gerald Seymour first said in his book Harry’s Game that, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. Each individual may view terrorism in a different light. Because of this, there is currently no universal definition of terrorism. However, in recent years, it has become increasingly more important to form a definition of terrorism, especially while working in the media.
Terrorism will happen again regardless of how prepared the U.S. thinks it may be. This means that it is the country’s job to ensure that there is a continuation of measures that should be taken to fight against terrorism. Others believe that the U.S. is fully prepared for another terrorist attack and that enough has been done. The question at hand is, should the U.S. still be concerned about terrorism. The United States needs to be concerned about terrorism to prevent tragedies like 9/11 from happening again, to address problems with domestic terrorism, and to improve homeland security.