SEVEN/FIFTY
The Centre for Constitutional Studies Blog

There are some fundamental legal principles that Canadian society rigorously protects. One such principle is the presumption that people are innocent until proven guilty, which is expressly protected by section 11(d) of the  Charter of Rights and Freedoms .   Section 11(d) states that   “any person charged with an offence has the right: to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.” [1]  This section exclusively applies to those who have been criminally charge

The Second and Third Criteria: Judicial Economy and the Proper Adjudicative Role of the Courts   The Quebec Court of Appeal’s discussion on the final two criteria for assessing mootness was relatively brief, which further highlights their narrow reading of Borowski .   The criterion of judicial economy concerns whether resolving a moot issue would be a worthwhile use of judicial resources. [1]  The practical effects on the rights of the parties, the likelihood that an issue w

Under Quebec’s Act respecting the laicity of the State  (“Bill 21”), certain public sector employees are prohibited from wearing religious symbols while performing their duties. [1]  Bill 21 further prohibits public sector employees and individuals accessing public services from wearing facial coverings and imposes sanctions such as disciplinary action or denial of service for failure to comply. [2]  The Act  has been challenged for violating religious freedom and gender equa

Drawing the Line: The Constitutional Boundaries of Positive Rights   As the jurisprudence discussed in Part I  of this article suggests, the question of whether the Charter  can be expanded to include a positive right to health care is deeply controversial and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future. This debate highlights a persistent tension between courts and legislatures, which courts have traditionally been reluctant to exacerbate through recognition and enforce

Is there a constitutional right to health care in Canada? Well… it’s complicated. On its face, the Supreme Court has been fairly clear: there’s no broad, guaranteed right to health care under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms . [1]  This can seem surprising, especially since Canada’s universal health care system is widely regarded as a core part of the country’s identity. But the issue isn’t off the table entirely and at the heart of this debate is a key distinction: positiv

In this expert Q&A, 2025 CCS Summer Student Nicole Ibalio talks to Professor Rebeca Macias Gimenez (University of Alberta) about her research on the Site C hydropower dam project (Peace River), the impacts it's having on First Nations in BC, and the role that treaty rights can play in challenging these impacts. Q. Could you give an overview of the Site C hydropower dam project, including relevant parties and effects on the land? A.  There are a number of First Nations that ar

In this expert Q&A, 2025 CCS Summer Student Areeba Ismail talks to Ian Peach — Consultation Manager for the Wolastoqey First Nation, former Dean of the UNB Law Faculty, and an expert in intergovernmental affairs — about the Carney government’s Bill C-5 ( An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act ). In particular, Areeba and Ian talk about the context and reasoning behind C-5, its potential impact on the rights of Indigenous p

When governments reach for the notwithstanding clause, three questions often get blurred together. Can they? Must they? Should they? These questions are related, but each demands a different kind of answer. “Can they” is a constitutional question about legal authority: does the Charter  permit this move? “Must they” is a question about necessity: were there viable alternatives that could have addressed the problem without overriding rights? “Should they” is a normative questi

Back in 2019, I published a paper called The Notwithstanding Clause and the New Populism , in which I argued that the ongoing justifiability of the notwithstanding clause was contingent on aspects of Canada’s political culture that were at risk of erosion. On the way to this conclusion, I dismissed defences of the notwithstanding clause couched in terms of legislative supremacy, arguing, in part, that such defences create a tension between the notwithstanding clause and the a

On Thursday, October 2, the Centre for Constitutional Studies hosted a talk by Andrew Stobo Sniderman  on the inadequacy of public services on First Nations reserves and the possibility that section 36 of the Constitution Act, 1982 could be used to challenge that inadequacy. [1]   The background to Sniderman’s talk is that Canadian law has created a serious conundrum for First Nations individuals. Given the under-funding of on-reserve services, many decide that it is better