Law : The Charter and the Courts intro

Prof Doug Thomson

21 Sept 202016:37

Summary

TLDRThis lecture explores the Charter of Rights and the role of courts in shaping law and morality in Canada. It discusses key questions about the nature of law, who should determine it, and how laws reflect societal values. The lecture covers rights versus freedoms, the balance between individual and group rights, and how historical events like Nazi Germany influenced legal thinking. It also touches on Canada's evolving legal landscape, focusing on the protection of minority rights and the ongoing debate over whether the Charter should evolve with modern societal changes.

Takeaways

📜 The lecture discusses the history and importance of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and how it relates to the Canadian legal system.
🤔 It poses questions about the universality of laws, the right to ignore disagreeable laws, and the possibility of communities having different civil laws.
🏛 The lecture explores who should determine the law, whether it should be representative government, courts, or the general public, and the implications of each.
📚 It defines law as a set of rules prescribed by the state or courts, generally instructing what not to do rather than what to do.
🏢 The lecture considers the source of law, questioning if it should be top-down from a small group or bottom-up from the people.
🗽 It discusses rights and freedoms, emphasizing the need to differentiate between the two, and provides examples of rights in a democracy.
🔍 The lecture contrasts Canadian laws with those in the United States, particularly regarding self-defense and the 'stand your ground' laws.
🌍 It touches on the concept of freedoms, such as speech, thought, assembly, association, and movement, and the complexities involved.
🏛️ The lecture examines the role of morality in law and how it has changed over time, affecting what is considered right or wrong.
📊 It provides historical examples of how laws have reflected the morality of the time, including changes in women's rights and minority rights.
📈 The lecture concludes by encouraging reflection on whether the Charter of Rights is a static document or one that should evolve with societal changes.

Q & A

What are the fundamental questions about law and society discussed in the lecture?
-The lecture prompts the audience to consider whether everyone should follow the same law, if individuals should be allowed to ignore laws they disagree with, and whether communities should be permitted to follow different laws in civil matters such as marriage and divorce.
What is the definition of law as presented in the lecture?
-Law is defined as a set of rules written by the state or by courts that individuals are prescribed to follow, which are generally negative in nature, instructing what not to do rather than what to do.
Who should determine the law in Canada according to the lecture?
-The lecture discusses various entities that could determine the law in Canada, including the representative government, courts, the Supreme Court, elected leaders in parliament, provincial and federal courts, and the general public.
What is the difference between a right and a freedom as discussed in the lecture?
-A right is something one is entitled to, such as the right to vote or the right to education, whereas freedom refers to the liberty to act or speak without constraint, such as freedom of speech or freedom of movement.
How does the lecture contrast Canadian self-defense laws with those of the United States?
-In Canada, one can defend themselves if under immediate threat but has a duty to retreat if possible. In contrast, the United States' 'stand your ground' laws allow the use of deadly force in self-defense without a duty to retreat, even in public places in some states.
What historical changes in morality and law are highlighted in the lecture?
-The lecture highlights changes such as the criminalization of abduction of women in 1909, equal grounds for divorce in 1925, and the inclusion of women in Canada's Olympic team in 1928, reflecting a shift in societal views on gender and rights.
What role did Bertha Wilson play in Canadian legal history as mentioned in the lecture?
-Bertha Wilson was the first woman justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, who wrote a majority judgment that struck down Canada's restrictive abortion law, significantly impacting women's rights in the country.
How does the lecture describe the purpose of the Charter of Rights?
-The Charter of Rights is designed to protect individual rights, minority rights, and community rights, particularly from the state. It reflects the societal values and the push for rights protection during the 1960s and 1970s.
What is the significance of the year 1982 in the context of the lecture?
-1982 is significant as it is the year the Charter of Rights was written, reflecting the societal feelings and the need for rights protection at that time.
What challenges does the lecture suggest the Charter of Rights faces in the modern age?
-The lecture suggests that the Charter of Rights must contend with modern issues such as freedom of speech on the internet, which is global, and the concept of freedom of movement in an interconnected world.
How does the lecture encourage the audience to think about democracy and rights?
-The lecture encourages the audience to consider whether democracy can infringe upon rights, the implications of having the right to vote, and the rarity of female prime ministers in Canada, prompting reflection on gender equality and political representation.

Outlines

00:00

📜 Introduction to Law and Society

The lecture begins by posing questions about the universality of law, the permissibility of ignoring disagreeable laws, and the possibility of communities having their own laws. It introduces the concept of law as a set of rules established by the state or courts and discusses who should determine these laws in Canada. The lecture also explores whether laws should be imposed top-down by a select group or bottom-up by the people. It touches on the idea of rights and freedoms, contrasting them and prompting the audience to consider their limits and the entities responsible for enforcing them. The lecture also references the 'Castle Doctrine' and 'Stand Your Ground' laws, comparing them to Canada's more restrained approach to self-defense.

05:01

🏛️ Rights, Freedoms, and Morality

This section delves into the complexities of rights and freedoms, such as freedom of speech, thought, assembly, association, and movement. It questions whether these should be limited and who should be the arbiter of such limitations. The lecture then connects to the topic of morality and how law reflects societal morals, using historical examples to illustrate how laws have evolved over time. It contrasts the moral beliefs of the 1940s, such as Nazi Germany's Aryan supremacy, with the social changes of the 1960s, including protests against racial integration, the Vietnam War, and the rise of various rights movements. The summary emphasizes the shift from government-centric morality to individual and minority rights, leading to the establishment of human rights declarations.

10:03

🌐 Historical Changes and the Charter of Rights

The lecture continues by discussing the historical push for minority rights and the incorporation of the UN Declaration of Human Rights into Canadian law. It highlights the protection of individual rights against state power, not just from criminal acts by others. The discussion includes the evolution of rights, such as women's rights to divorce on equal grounds, the inclusion of women in the Olympic team, and the fight against restrictive abortion laws. It also mentions the first woman justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Bertha Wilson, and her role in striking down Canada's abortion law. The lecture emphasizes the balance of individual, community, and national rights as reflected in the Charter of Rights, written in 1982.

15:04

🔄 The Evolving Nature of Rights and Freedoms

The final paragraph ponders whether the Charter of Rights is a static document or if it should evolve with societal changes. It raises questions about the application of freedom of speech in the context of the global internet and the implications for freedom of movement and thought in a modern age. The lecture prompts reflection on whether hate speech falls under free speech and how religious freedom interacts with the principle of equality. It also questions the democratic process, considering Canada's history with female prime ministers, and encourages critical thinking about the ongoing relevance and adaptability of rights and freedoms as outlined in the Charter.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡Charter

The Charter refers to a document, likely the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which outlines the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals in Canada. It is central to the video's theme as it sets the stage for discussing the legal framework within which rights and laws operate. The script mentions the Charter in the context of protecting rights and freedoms, and how it reflects societal values at the time of its creation in 1982.

💡Law

Law, as defined in the script, is a set of rules established by the state or courts that citizens are expected to follow. It is a foundational concept in the video, as it explores the nature of law, who should determine it, and how it should be applied. The script discusses laws as generally negative ('don't do this') and ponders who should have the authority to create them, whether it be government, courts, or the public.

💡Morality

Morality in the script is discussed as the principles or beliefs that distinguish right from wrong, which often influence the creation and interpretation of laws. It is integral to the video's narrative as it examines how societal values and ethics have shaped and continue to shape legal systems. The script provides historical examples, such as Nazi Germany's Aryan supremacy, to illustrate how morality can be reflected in law.

💡Rights

Rights are the privileges or entitlements that individuals have, which are often protected by law. The script explores the concept of rights extensively, questioning what rights exist in a democracy and how they are limited. It also contrasts rights with freedoms, using examples like the right to vote or the right to education, and discusses the differences in these rights between Canada and the United States.

💡Freedoms

Freedoms refer to the liberties or rights to act or think without constraint. The video delves into the complexities of freedoms, asking whether they should be unlimited and who should determine their boundaries. It uses freedoms like speech, thought, assembly, association, and movement to explore these issues and contrasts Canadian and U.S. laws, such as 'stand your ground' laws.

💡Sue Generous Law

The term 'sue generous law' seems to be a play on 'sovereign law,' which implies a single, overarching legal system. The script uses this term to question whether there should be a single legal system or if communities should be allowed to have their own laws, touching upon the idea of legal pluralism versus a unified legal system.

💡Self-Defense

Self-defense is the right to protect oneself from harm. The script discusses the concept in the context of Canadian and U.S. laws, highlighting the differences in how self-defense is legally interpreted and applied. It contrasts the 'castle doctrine' and 'stand your ground' laws of the U.S. with Canada's more restrictive approach to the use of force in self-defense.

💡Democracy

Democracy is a system of government where citizens have the power to make decisions, often through voting. The script mentions democracy in the context of rights, such as the right to vote, and questions the implications of these rights. It also raises the issue of whether certain rights, like the right to vote, should be compulsory, using Australia's system as an example.

💡Parliament

Parliament is the legislative branch of government, composed of elected officials who represent the people. The script discusses the role of parliament in law creation and questions whether laws should be determined by elected leaders or other entities, such as the courts or the public, to prevent potential abuse of power for self-interest.

💡Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the judicial system and has the power to interpret laws and make decisions that are binding on other courts. The script mentions the Supreme Court in the context of who should determine the law, contrasting it with other potential law-makers like the government or the public.

💡Charter of Rights

The Charter of Rights is a specific reference to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is part of the Constitution of Canada. The script discusses the Charter in terms of its role in protecting individual and minority rights from the state. It also raises questions about whether the Charter should be seen as immutable or adaptable to changing societal values.

Highlights

The necessity for everyone in society to follow the same law.

Questioning whether individuals should be allowed to ignore laws they disagree with.

The debate over whether communities should have the right to follow different laws in civil matters such as marriage and divorce.

The definition of law as a set of rules established by the state or courts.

The question of who should determine the law in Canada: representative government, courts, or the Supreme Court.

The distinction between top-down and bottom-up law creation.

The impact of different groups setting the law on society.

The difference between rights and freedoms in a democracy.

The concept of 'stand your ground' and 'castle doctrine' laws in the United States versus Canada's approach to self-defense.

The idea that freedoms and rights should not be unlimited and the question of who should limit them.

The historical context of rights and how they reflect the morality of society at different times.

The shift in morality and societal beliefs from the 1940s to the 1960s and its impact on law.

The role of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights in shaping Canadian law.

The historical changes in Canadian law regarding women's rights and the role of the first female justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Bertha Wilson.

The balance of individual, community, and national rights as outlined in the Canadian Charter of Rights.

The question of whether the Charter of Rights is a fixed document or if it should evolve with societal changes.

The complexities of freedom of speech and religion in the context of modern global challenges.