Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Charter adjudication (1)
- Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Environmental law; administrative law; regulation; rule of law; emergency powers; common law constitutionalism (1)
-
- Equality (1)
- Judicial activism (1)
- Legislative purpose (1)
- Overbreadth (1)
- Police powers; public order policing; charter; rule of law; G20; protest; civil liberties (1)
- Proportionality (1)
- Purpose (1)
- Purpose construction (1)
- Statutory interpretation (1)
- Statutory purpose (1)
- Supreme Court of Canada (1)
- Terrorism; rule of law; overbreadth; constitution; vagueness; racial profiling (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Rule of Law
R. V. Safarzadeh-Markhali: Elements And Implications Of The Supreme Court's New Rigorous Approach To Construction Of Statutory Purpose, Marcus Moore
All Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Safarzadeh-Markhali holds great significance, beyond Criminal Law, in the area of Statutory Interpretation: in Markhali, the Court decisively endorses a new rigorous approach to construing legislative purpose. Previously, while legislation itself was long-interpreted utilizing rigorous approaches, legislative purpose was typically construed ad hoc while providing only summary justification. Markhali’s new framework is distinct from prior approaches in at least four ways: (1) It expressly acknowledges the critical importance of purpose construction in many cases; (2) It is conscious of how a less-than-rigorous approach risks being self-defeating of larger legal analyses in which the …
The Environmental Emergency And The Legality Of Discretion In Environmental Law, Jocelyn Stacey
The Environmental Emergency And The Legality Of Discretion In Environmental Law, Jocelyn Stacey
All Faculty Publications
This article argues that environmental issues confront us as an ongoing emergency. The epistemic features of serious environmental issues – the fact that we cannot reliably distinguish ex ante between benign policy choices and choices that may lead to environmental catastrophe – are the same features of an emergency. This means that, like emergencies, environmental issues pose a fundamental challenge for the rule of law: they reveal the necessity of unconstrained executive discretion. Discretion is widely lamented as a fundamental flaw in Canadian environmental law, which undermines both environmental protection and the rule of law itself. Through the conceptual framework …
The Policing Of Major Events In Canada: Lessons From Toronto's G20 And Vancouver's Olympics, W. Wesley Pue, Robert Diab, Grace Jackson
The Policing Of Major Events In Canada: Lessons From Toronto's G20 And Vancouver's Olympics, W. Wesley Pue, Robert Diab, Grace Jackson
All Faculty Publications
Major events ranging from sporting events to major international conferences too often result in disorder, deployment of riot squads, and mass arrests. Events surrounding a meeting of the G20 in Toronto and those at Vancouver’s Winter Olympics provide insight into the ways in which things can go wrong and the ways in which they can go well at major events. This article employs a “thick history” of events in order to explore gaps in Canadian law, including gaps between “law in the books” and “law in action.”
The legal frameworks governing large-scale events affect the likelihood of success measured in …
The Problem Of Official Discretion In Anti-Terrorism Law: Comment On Khawajah, W. Wesley Pue, Robert Russo
The Problem Of Official Discretion In Anti-Terrorism Law: Comment On Khawajah, W. Wesley Pue, Robert Russo
All Faculty Publications
This paper assesses the first judicial ruling on key provisions of the Anti Terrorism Act. Rutherford J.'s ruling struck down provisions creating a motive requirement in the definition of terrorist activity while upholding the overall structure of the act against challenges on the basis of overbreadth and vagueness. A fault-line divides the two sides of the ruling. On one side the court looked to the lived-experience of legal rules, concluding that including motive requirements would mislead officials in the direction of improper and unconstitutional racial or religious profiling. On the other side of the fault-line the court restricted itself to …