|
The April Supreme Court ruling
on Vriend vs. the Government of Alberta serves as yet another
wake-up call to Canadians concerned about the dissolution
of democracy in our nation. In this decision, the Supreme
Court ordered the Province of Alberta to grant homosexuality
special status under it's Individual Rights Protection Act,
despite the fact that the vast majority of citizens do not
support granting this status.
This is only one of many
Court rulings across the nation that show an alarming
trend towards judicial tyranny. Canada may be legally
a democracy, ruled by the people through their elected
representatives. But since the adoption of the CHARTER
OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS (1982), judges have been remaking
the law.
"Canadian's are just
beginning to discover just how much of our public life
is now dictated by unelected judges," says University
of Calgary constitutional expert Ted Morton. He details
the court's "judicial activism" in dozens of
cases:
 |
In
FEENEY (1997), the court simply released a confessed
murderer. Police had entered his home, to find him
splattered with his 85-year-old victim's blood,
and he confessed. But the court ruled unexpectedly
that police now need a special warrant to enter
a suspect's residence, so Feeney walked.
|
|
In
ASKOV (1990), the court ruled that a trial delay
of more than eight months was "agony"
for suspects (though such delays usually result
from their own lawyers). So, since 1990-91, the
Crown dismissed 28,216 murder, extortion, rape and
other charges.
|
|
As
a result of MAHE (1990), the federal courts now
manage francophone education in Alberta, Saskatchewan,
Manitoba, Ontario and Nova Scotia.
|
|
In
SPARROW (1990), the court resurrected mythical Indian
land claims. The court then ruled (1996) that natives
cannot be fined for fishing without a license, and
later (1997) surrendered a large swath of British
Columbia to tribal control.
|
|
In
SINGH (1985), the court dictated mandatory oral
hearings for all refugees, regardless of the merits
of their claims. That backlogged 124,000 claims,
released 15,000 claimants into society without hearings,
and forced administrative changes costing $60 million
yearly.
|
|
In
BIG M DRUG MART (1985), the court said the Alberta's
Lord's Day Act violated the religious freedom of
a store, and defined Canada as a "secular society"
(though the Charter declares us a country "under
God"). ZYLBERBUR later forbade voluntary school
prayer, in the name of religious freedom.
|
|
Since
CARTER (1991), federal courts have been redrawing
electoral maps in Saskatchewan, Alberta, British
Columbia and PEI. The court has also struck down
long-standing policies, denying prison inmates the
right to vote.
|
|
The
court's gift to feminists has been abortion. In
MORGENTALER (1988), the court simply struck down
the existing law. It has since ignored arguments
about the humanity of the unborn. Feminists win
70% of their claims. In 1993, the court ruled that
female university students may take complaints about
their grades to provincial human rights tribunals.
|
|
In
EGAN (1996), the court decided unanimously that
"sexual orientation" was a ground of discrimination
like "race." Thus enshrining the gay lifestyle
in the Charter, it encouraged lower courts to reshape
laws on adoption, income tax, pension plans and
insurance provisions.
|
|
In
the past, someone "not guilty by reason of
insanity" could be held over in a mental institution,
since they might still be dangerous. But in SWAIN
(1991), the court demanded that such perpetrators
be "protected from arbitrary detention."
|
Scott Newark, executive director
of the Canadian Police Association, says, "What we
have now in Canada is a despotism, rule by people who
think they know better than everybody else. The Canadian
public still has a broad-but-shallow trust in the Charter
of Rights and Freedoms and the Supreme Court," he
admits. "But at some point, the court will let one-too-many
killers walk, and the public will wake up."
|
