Judicial Power and Canadian Democracy

Sprednja platnica
Paul Howe, Peter H. Russell
McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP, 2001 - 327 strani
The role the courts should play in Canada's political system is a long-simmering issue. Ever since the Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into effect in 1982, Canada's courts have been empowered to strike down any legislation held to contravene Canadians' basic rights. While any number of court rulings since that time have caused a stir in legal and political circles, in the past several years judicial decisions have attracted the attention of a broader public. Landmark rulings on a range of controversial issues, from aboriginal claims to gay rights, have captured the headlines and catalysed public debate over the merits of judicial power. These controversies raise challenging questions about the role of a powerful judiciary in a democracy. In Judicial Power and Canadian Democracy, a series of essays commissioned by the Institute for Research on Public Policy, some of Canada's foremost commentators – academics, politicians, and Supreme Court judges themselves – take up the debate. Some tangle over the pivotal question of whether judges should have the decisive say on issues involving entrenched rights that have profound implication for the policy preferences of elected bodies. Others examine related issues, including Supreme Court appointment procedures, interest group litigation, the historical roots of the notwithstanding clause, and the state of public opinion on Canada's courts. Those interested in the power of the judicial branch will find much in this collection to stimulate fresh thinking on issues that are likely to remain on the public agenda for years to come.
Contributors include Joseph F. Fletcher (Toronto), Janet Hiebert (Queen's), Gregory Hein (Toronto), Peter W. Hogg (York), Paul Howe, Rainer Knopff (Calgary), Sébastien Lebel-Grenier (Sherbrooke), Howard Leeson (Regina), Kate Malleson (London School of Economics), E. Preston Manning (Reform Party of Canada), Hon. Beverley McLachlin (Supreme Court of Canada), F.L. Morton (Calgary), Pierre Patenaude (Sherbrooke), Peter Russell, Allison A. Thornton (Blake, Cassels and Graydon), Frederick Vaughan (emeritus, Guelph), Lorraine Eisenstat Weinrib (Toronto), Hon. Bertha Wilson (emeritus, Supreme Court of Canada), and Jacob Ziegel (Toronto).
 

Mnenja - Napišite recenzijo

Na običajnih mestih nismo našli nobenih recenzij.

Vsebina

Patterns and Trends
3
Incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights
27
ARE JUDGES TOO POWERFUL? DEBATE AND DIALOGUE
61
Courts Legislatures and Executives in the PostCharter Era
63
We Didnt Volunteer
73
The Activist Constitution
80
Courts Dont Make Good Compromises
87
The Charter and Legitimization of Judicial Activism
94
Dialogue or Monologue?
111
Reforms Judicial Agenda
118
A B for Prof Russell
123
JUDICIAL AUTHORITY ISSUES AND CONTROVERSIES
129
Merit Selection and Democratization of Appointments to the Supreme Court of Canada
131
Judges Parliament and the Making of Social Policy
165
Interest Group Litigation and Canadian Democracy
214
Public Opinion and Canadas Courts
255

The Provincial Court Judges Case and Extended Judicial Control
99
The Charter Dialogue between Courts and Legislatures
106
A Paper Tiger?
297
Avtorske pravice

Druge izdaje - Prikaži vse

Pogosti izrazi in povedi

O avtorju (2001)

Paul Howe is associate professor, political science, University of New Brunswick, and a research fellow at the Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP). André Blais is professor, political science, Université de Montréal, researcher, Centre interu

Bibliografski podatki