Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Governance And Anarchy In The S.2(B) Jurisprudence: A Comment On Vancouver Sun And Harper V. Canada, Jamie Cameron
Governance And Anarchy In The S.2(B) Jurisprudence: A Comment On Vancouver Sun And Harper V. Canada, Jamie Cameron
Jamie Cameron
The article identifies and explains a double standard in the Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence. The contrast is between the open court jurisprudence, which is a model of good constitutional governance – or principled decision making – and the Court’s s.2(b) methodology, which is “anarchistic” or capricious and undisciplined, in the sense of this article. Two landmark cases decided in 2004 illustrate the double standard: the first is Re Vancouver Sun, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 332, which dealt with the open court principle under Parliament’s anti-terrorism provision for investigative hearings, it represents a high water mark for open court and s.2(b) …
The Charter And Criminal Justice: Twenty-Five Years Later, Jamie Cameron, James Stribopoulos
The Charter And Criminal Justice: Twenty-Five Years Later, Jamie Cameron, James Stribopoulos
Jamie Cameron
When the Charter of Rights and Freedoms turned twenty-five in 2007, Professors Jamie Cameron and James Stribopoulos organized a conference which brought together leading thinkers on the Charterand criminal justice. A strong faculty of academics, judges and practitioners debated and discussed the Charter's impact on criminal justice. The papers from this conference, which have now been edited by Professors Cameron and Stribopoulos, provide a fascinating look at how the Charter has transformed the Canadian criminal justice system.
Journalists And Their Secret Sources, Jamie Cameron
Journalists And Their Secret Sources, Jamie Cameron
Jamie Cameron
Jamie Cameron, Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, on confidential sources, free press and the link to democratic values.
Abstract Principle V. Contextual Conceptions Of Harm: A Comment On R. V. Butler, Jamie Cameron
Abstract Principle V. Contextual Conceptions Of Harm: A Comment On R. V. Butler, Jamie Cameron
Jamie Cameron
This comment provides a critique of the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R. v. Butler, which held that section 163(8) of the Criminal Code, defining obscenity, is a reasonable limit on freedom of expression under section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Before discussing the Charter, the Court expanded the scope of section 163(8) to include a prohibition against sexually explicit material that is degrading or dehumanizing. Initially, the author is critical of the Court's methodology, which enlarged section 163(8) at the expense of expressive freedom, without even mentioning the Charter. Once the Court had interpreted …