About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

22 Const. F. 1 (2013)

handle is hein.journals/consfo22 and id is 1 raw text is: Introduction Patricia Paradis* In September, 2012, the Centre for Constitu- tional Studies and the Faculty of Law, Univer- sity of Alberta, in collaboration with the Legal Education Society of Alberta, hosted a day-long Constitutional Symposium for legal practitio- ners and students of law. Legal academics and practitioners provided stimulating and thought provoking updates on recent jurisprudence in the constitutional area, focussing on Charter1 sections 2, 7 and 15, the division of powers, ab- original rights and the Charter and criminal law. Of the twelve papers presented at this Sym- posium, eight are featured in this Special Issue of the Constitutional Forum. We begin this Special Issue with an article by Peter Sankoff. He forecasts the potential for a perfect storm, one that could result in the use of a little-used Charter provision to deal with a some of the government's cherished mandatory minimum penalties. Sankoff fo- cusses on three pressure systems at play which, when they collide, will provide the court with an opportunity to change from the retreat and timidity approach with which it has tradition- ally handled section 12 cases, to a more consis- tent and productive analysis for that obscure section. Colin Feasby criticizes the Alberta Court of Appeal for its minimalist-style ruling in the Pridgen' case. He analyzes the U.S. and Cana- dian courts' respective approaches to judicial minimalism, arguing that while minimalism is consistent with the Canadian common law tra- dition of making decisions one case at a time, it should be guarded against by lower courts. The Pridgen case, he argues, was a missed opportu- nity for the court to provide guidance on the Charter vis-a-vis universities. Jennifer Koshan carefully compares and contrasts section 7 and section 15 of the Charter as tools for disadvan- taged persons challenging the harms of govern- ment (in)action. She notes the lack of success of several recent section 15 cases but reminds us that, unlike section 7, section 15 protects against harms that are constitutionally recog- nized. She observes that framing government harms as violations of life, liberty or security of the person cannot be a winning strategy for all Charter claimants. On the Aboriginal rights front, both au- thors express concern about the ways in which the duty to consult with Aboriginal peoples, as articulated in Haida Nation', is being applied and interpreted by governments, tribunals and courts. Neil Reddekopp analyzes the Alberta Government's approach to implementation of the Haida Nation decision in its Consultation Policy. He argues that the Policy has unconsti- tutional aspects and that what appears as regu- latory peace at the moment is not the result of this Policy but rather is the result of negotiated agreements which, at least in the short term, appear to benefit both First Nations and re- source developers. Janna Promislow examines the duty to consult and accommodate since the Carrier Sekani4 decision of 2010. While there is reason to see progress, particularly in signal- ling the constitutional nature of the duty and its integration within administrative law prin- ciples, she notes that the inconsistencies with which lower courts and tribunals apply estab- lished administrative law principles appear to signal an inclination to avoid the duty. This, she concludes, undermines the process of reconcili- ation envisaged in Haida Nation. Constitutional Forum constitutionnel

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most