LAWS 2502 Lecture 6

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What does the right to life protect against?

Government actions that increase specific risks to life (correct)

Increased risks from private parties

Personal choices that may lead to harm

All forms of death, despite circumstances

Which aspect of the right to liberty involves physical restraint?

Psychological autonomy

Personal dignity

Physical aspect (correct)

Social engagement

What can be implicated by the psychological aspect of the right to liberty?

Government oversight on lifestyle choices

Medical treatment refusal (correct)

Public health mandates

Physical discipline in the workplace

Which of the following is NOT implicated by the right to liberty?

On standby duty for employment Signup and view all the answers

How is the right to security interpreted?

Broadly to include psychological integrity Signup and view all the answers

What is the first step in demonstrating a deprivation of life, liberty, or security of the person?

Demonstrating the actual deprivation Signup and view all the answers

Which legal principle is required for a rule to be considered a principle of fundamental justice?

It must be a legal principle Signup and view all the answers

What does the right to security include?

Control over one's own integrity Signup and view all the answers

What does Section 7 of the Charter require for laws or actions that interfere with life, liberty, and security?

They must conform to the principles of fundamental justice. Signup and view all the answers

Who is excluded from the protection of Section 7 as defined in the Charter?

Corporations. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is necessary to trigger Section 7 of the Charter?

A government action must result in deprivation of life, liberty, or security. Signup and view all the answers

What is the scope of justifying violations of Section 7 under Section 1 of the Charter?

There is a relatively limited scope for justification. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is NOT part of the three-part test for Section 7?

Is the action publicly accepted? Signup and view all the answers

What must be demonstrated first to establish a violation of Section 7?

A deprivation of life, liberty, or security of the person. Signup and view all the answers

What result follows if a deprivation of life, liberty, or security is according to the principles of fundamental justice?

There will be no violation of Section 7. Signup and view all the answers

To whom does the term 'everyone' in Section 7 refer?

Human beings, excluding corporations. Signup and view all the answers

What is the total number of marks for Option #2 of the exam format?

50 marks Signup and view all the answers

What principle does Section 7 of the Charter protect?

The right to life, liberty, and security of the person Signup and view all the answers

What requirement must be met according to the policy introduced by the Government of Saskatchewan for students under age 16?

Parental/guardian consent is required for name and pronoun changes Signup and view all the answers

What impact is the pronoun policy expected to have on gender diverse students under 16, according to the concern expressed?

It will cause irreparable harm and force difficult decisions Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following best describes the purpose of a fact-pattern question in the exam format?

To analyze a fictional scenario against the principles of law Signup and view all the answers

What is the purpose of the Zoom Q&A session mentioned in the exam format?

To clarify doubts regarding the exam format Signup and view all the answers

What statement reflects a concern some have regarding the pronoun policy introduced by Saskatchewan's government?

It may infringe on the rights of gender diverse students Signup and view all the answers

Which outcome might occur if the pronoun policy remains ineffective?

Permanent damage to the mental health of vulnerable students Signup and view all the answers

Which principle of fundamental justice prohibits legal decisions that do not relate to the law's purpose?

Arbitrariness Signup and view all the answers

What principle ensures that laws do not excessively infringe upon rights compared to their intended purpose?

Overbreadth Signup and view all the answers

Which case primarily dealt with a woman's right to security concerning abortion laws?

R.v.Morgantaler Signup and view all the answers

What does the principle of gross disproportionality generally address?

The severity of law's effects compared to its objectives Signup and view all the answers

Which principle allows young persons to receive a presumption of decreased moral culpability during sentencing?

Diminished moral culpability Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following principles is associated with the confidentiality of lawyers and notaries?

Professional secrecy Signup and view all the answers

In the context of legal principles, what does the term 'overbreadth' primarily refer to?

Laws that encompass more than necessary regarding rights infringements Signup and view all the answers

Which case highlighted the issue of unnecessary criminalization concerning abortion access?

R.v.Morgantaler Signup and view all the answers

What was a significant issue regarding Section 251 in Morgantaler's case?

It was considered a violation of a woman's security of the person. Signup and view all the answers

In Morgantaler's case, what issue arose due to the vagueness of the term 'health'?

It led to inconsistencies in standards across committees. Signup and view all the answers

What was a consequence of the mandatory procedure delays in obtaining therapeutic abortions?

Higher probability of complications and risks. Signup and view all the answers

In Canada v. Bedford, what was the argument made by the plaintiffs regarding sections 210, 212(1)(j), and 213(1)(c) of the Criminal Code?

They argued these laws violated sex workers’ rights under the Charter. Signup and view all the answers

Why was Section 251 considered manifestly unfair in Morgantaler's second inquiry?

It required a minimum of four physicians for an abortion. Signup and view all the answers

What did the Supreme Court ultimately decide regarding the justification of Section 251 under section 1 of the Charter?

It concluded the provision was not justified. Signup and view all the answers

What did the provincial approval for hospitals entail regarding therapeutic abortions in Morgantaler's case?

It further limited the hospitals qualified to perform abortions. Signup and view all the answers

What fundamental rights did the plaintiffs claim were violated by the criminal laws in Canada v. Bedford?

Right to life, liberty, and security of the person. Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

Section 7 of the Charter

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person, and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

Recent Issues

The Government of Saskatchewan introduced a policy regarding the use of preferred first names and pronouns by students.
The policy requires parental/ guardian consent for students under the age of 16 regarding gender identity disclosure.
The policy is being challenged because it is believed to infringe upon the human rights of gender diverse students.

Purpose

Section 7 requires laws or government actions that interfere with life, liberty and security of the person to conform to the principles of fundamental justice.

General Considerations

Section 7 applies to human beings only.
Non-Canadians physically present in Canada are also protected by section 7.
Section 7 can be triggered when the law or government action deprives life, liberty or security of the person.
There is a limited scope for justifying violations of section 7 under section 1 of the Charter.

Analytical Framework

The applicable framework for determining a violation of section 7 is made up of three parts:
- Is there a real or imminent deprivation of life, liberty or security of the person?
- What are the relevant principles of fundamental justice?
- Is the deprivation in accordance with the relevant principles of fundamental justice?
Demonstrating a deprivation of life, liberty, or security of the person is only the first step in proving a violation.

Life, Liberty and Security of the Person

Right to Life:
- Protects against government action imposing or increasing the risk of death.
Right to Liberty:
- Includes physical and psychological aspects.
- The physical aspect protects against physical restraint.
- The psychological aspect protects personal autonomy.
Right to Security:
- Protects a person's physical and psychological integrity.
- Includes freedom from the threat of physical punishment or maltreatment.

Principles of Fundamental Justice – Test

To be considered a principle of fundamental justice, a rule or principle must:
- Be a legal principle
- Have significant societal consensus that it is fundamental to how the legal system should operate
- Be identified with sufficient precision to measure deprivations of life, liberty, or security of the person

Principles of Fundamental Justice – Examples

Principles of fundamental justice include the following:
- Arbitrariness
- Overbreadth
- Gross Disproportionality
Other Principles
- Young persons are entitled to a presumption of diminished moral culpability on sentencing.
- The independence and impartiality of the judiciary is a principle of fundamental justice.
- A person should not face the penalty or stigma of criminal liability in relation to conduct that was physically or morally involuntary.
- The professional secrecy of lawyers and notaries is a principle of fundamental justice.

Principles of Fundamental Justice – Our Focus

Arbitrariness: Deprivation of a protected interest that bears no relation to the law’s purpose.
Overbreadth: Laws that are so broad in scope that they deprive a protected interest in circumstances that bear no relation to the legislative purpose.
Gross Disproportionality: Laws that may be rationally connected to the legislative purpose but whose effects are, in terms of their severity, totally out of sync with that objective.

R. v. Morgentaler

Section 251 of the Criminal Code required a pregnant woman seeking an abortion to apply to a “therapeutic abortion committee” at an accredited or approved hospital.
Women were left with a difficult choice: carry an undesired pregnancy to term or commit a crime to obtain an abortion.
Three doctors, including Dr. Morgentaler, were criminally charged after setting up a clinic to perform abortions for women without the necessary approval.

R. v. Morgentaler - First Inquiry

Section 251 interferes with a woman’s physical and bodily integrity.
Forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term unless certain criteria unrelated to her own priorities and aspirations are met, is a profound interference with a woman’s body.
The delay in obtaining a therapeutic abortion caused by the mandatory procedures of section 251 results in a higher probability of complications and a greater risk.
The psychological integrity of women seeking abortions was also harmed by these restrictions.

R. v. Morgentaler - Second Inquiry

Section 251 was not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice because it was manifestly unfair.
The word “health” under section 251 lacks clarity, and no adequate guidelines were established for therapeutic abortion committees.
The requirement that there be at least four physicians available at that hospital to authorize and perform an abortion makes abortions unavailable in many hospitals.
The provincial approval for a hospital to perform therapeutic abortions further restricts the number of hospitals offering this procedure.

R. v. Morgentaler - Conclusion

Section 251 was found to be unconstitutional and was not justified under section 1 of the Charter.

Canada v. Bedford

Terri-Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch, and Valerie Scott argued that ss. 210 (bawdy-house), 212(1)(j) (living off the profits of prostitution) and 213(1)(c) (communicating) of the Criminal Code violated sex workers’ rights.
These individuals argued that the Criminal Code sections violated the Charter, including their right to life, liberty and security of person under s. 7 of the Charter.

Studying That Suits You

Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

Description

Test your knowledge on Section 7 of the Canadian Charter, which guarantees the right to life, liberty, and security of the person. Explore recent issues surrounding policies that affect gender diverse students, and understand the principles of fundamental justice involved. This quiz will cover important legal frameworks and current challenges in the context of human rights.