Potential Struggle Between the Legislative and Judicial Branches of Canada: A Contestational Approach to Interpreting the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Through Bedford & PHS Community Services

It appears your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. Download adobe Acrobat or click here to download the PDF file.

Click here to download the PDF file.

Creator: 

Lecoq, Garrett Gerald Leon Peter

Date: 

2016

Abstract: 

This project examines how two recent controversial Canadian Supreme Court decisions, Bedford and PHS Community Services, combined with their legislative responses, demonstrate competing interpretations of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms between the legislative and judicial branches of the state. Using Bonnie Honig’s account of agonism, this paper creates a contestation-centred approach that emphasizes disagreement between these branches to illustrate how, despite what the judicial dialogue literature insists, a final interpretation of the Charter is not possible. The remainder of this project demonstrates how the legislature’s responses to these cases could have been more democratic by emphasizing the contestation taking place between it and the judiciary over the interpretation of the Charter. Specifically, it argues that the contestation in these instances could have been made more accessible by the legislature justifying its decision to resist the judiciary’s interpretations of the Charter, or, in exceptional circumstances, invoking the notwithstanding clause.

Subject: 

Political Science
Law
Sociology

Language: 

English

Publisher: 

Carleton University

Thesis Degree Name: 

Master of Arts: 
M.A.

Thesis Degree Level: 

Master's

Thesis Degree Discipline: 

Legal Studies

Parent Collection: 

Theses and Dissertations

Items in CURVE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. They are made available with permission from the author(s).