Law Journal Library - Skip to main content
Content Start

Click here to view short-term subscription options to access this document.

6 Appeal: Rev. Current L. & L. Reform 14 (2000)
Judicial Activism in R. v. Sharpe: An Administration or Perversion of Justice

handle is hein.journals/appeal6 and id is 16 raw text is: T RE N DS  A ND  D EV E LOP ME NT S
o~lr Pevrso o.Itlr fil~l~~
Jf u  stie  i

I Porn ruling draws
public wrath Toronto
Star (25 January 1999)
A16; Ian Bailey, Judge
in BC child-porn case
receives death threat
over ruling Globe &
Mai/Met Edition (23
January 1999) A10;
Carla Yu, See no evil:
moral taboos tumble as
a judge uses the charter
to legalize child porn
Bn isb Columbia Report
v.10:7 (8 February 1999)
at 38-42; Mark Hume,
Child por will flourish
without law, police
warn National Post (27
April 1999) Al, AS.
2 R. v. Sharpe (1999), 169
Dominion Law Reports
(4th) 536 (British
Columbia Supreme
3 Revised Statutes of
Canada 1985, chapter C-
46; hereinafter cited as
the Criminal Code.
4 Part I of the
Cons itution Act, 1982,
being Schedule B to by
Canada Act 1982 (U.K.),
1982, c1 1; hereinafter
the Charter.
5 R v. Sharpe (1999), 175
Dominion Law Reports
(4th) 1 (British
Columbia Court of
Appeal); hereinafter
cited to Dominion Law
Reports as Sharpe.

I. Introduction
F ew Canadian judicial decisions have generated more outragei than the 1999 British
Columbia Supreme Court2 ruling striking down the Criminal Code of Canada3 prohibi-
tion of child pornography possession. The British Columbia Court of Appeal affirmed the
finding that the prohibition was an unjustifiable restriction on freedom of expression, as
guaranteed by section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,4 in July of 1999.'
These judgments were labelled completely unacceptable and inappropriate6 and prompted
the dire warning that such liberal interpretation of the Charter's guarantees would give license
to extreme social deviance and lead incrementally to the legalization of intergenerational
sex.7 This outrage quickly became a criticism of the judiciary and a justice system wholly
oblivious to the public mood.' The Official Opposition in Parliament was also quick to jump
on the controversial ruling, issuing such statements as the following:
the real legal nuclear bomb... is the abuse of judicial authority exercised by judges such
as the one in this case, where they use their own narrow parochial, social, political values
to impose them on society, contra the virtual unanimity of Canadian democracy.'
Further, the Opposition also suggested that as a response to such judicial politics, the Federal
Government use the Charter's section 33 notwithstanding clause to uphold the prohibition
on possession of child pornography.0
An examination of the reasoning of the majority at the Court of Appeal, however,
illustrates that outrage surrounding the ruling is more ignorance conjured up... [by] the
spectre of a judge giving judicial approval to sexual exploitation of prepubescent children...
contrary to the will of Parliament' than legitimate concern over judicial activism. Indeed,
rather than an example of the courts usurping the power of the legislature, the Sbarpe decision
is a demonstration of the judiciary fulfilling its proper institutional role by ensuring that
Parliament acts within the legal confines of the Constitution.
II. Background
At issue in the Sbarpe case is the constitutional validity of section 163.1(4) of the

1  14  A   P  P   F  A  I I  N  T  AA

Already a Subscriber?

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is the world’s largest image-based and fully searchable legal and academic research database. Material contained in HeinOnline is an exact replication of the original printed product, and coverage is typically comprehensive. Contact us today for a free demo of this incredible resource.

We offer annual subscriptions to all HeinOnline collections to universities, colleges, law firms, individuals, and other institutions. To request a quote or trial, please click here.

Please note: the content in the Law Journal Library is constantly changing and some content has restrictions as required per the license. Therefore, please review the available content via the following link to ensure the material you wish to access is included in the database. For a complete list of content included in the Law Journal Library, please click here.

Learn More About the Law Journal Library (pdf)
Back To Top Jump To Bottom