AP/PPAS/POLS 3136 3. A Public Law II: The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Limits of Public Administration
Summer 2017 (S1)
Course Director: Dr. Sirvan Karimi
Class Hours: Monday(s) and Wednesday(s); 7-10 PM
Class location: R N145
Office Hours and Location: 133 McLaughlin College, Wednesdays: 5:00-6:00 PM
Email:
Course Description:
This course is designed to examine the main provisions in the charter and discuss how these provisions have been interpreted by the courts. It briefly discusses the historical evolution of human rights provisions in Canada. However, the main focus of this course is the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Throughout the course, key provisions including freedom of expression, legal right, equality rights, language rights, aboriginal rights and judicial review of public administration will be examined. Finally, the limitations of the Charter and ongoing debates on the desirability of its entrenchment in the Constitution Act of 1982 will be evaluated.
Learning Objectives:
By the end of the term, students are expected to;
1- understand the historical background to the entrenchment of the Charter in Constitution Act of 1982.
2- get a grasp of the pre-charter mechanisms of rights protection
3 - acquire a foundational understanding of the process of judicial review in the context of the charter and human rights legislation.
4- understand the limits of charter protected rights.
5- gain an appreciation for complexity associated with the interplay of judicial review and politics.
6- develop analytical and research skills that are essential for pursuing advanced studies in the field of public administration and public law.
Format: The course will consist of lectures, interactive discussion of the readings, and occasional audio-visual presentations. Lecture notes and course announcements will be posted on the course moodle. Course lecture takes place during the first part of class. During the second part of class there will be class discussion. In order to facilitate class discussion and participation, students are expected to read the assigned readings.
Required Textbook:
Roach, Kent, Robert J. Sharpe. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 5th Edition. Toronto: Irwin Law, 2013.
*** During the course of study, additional readings may be assigned or recommended.
Suggested Book:
Peter W. Hogg, Constitutional Law of Canada, Student Edition. Toronto: Carswell, 2014.
Web Resources:
Supreme Court of Canada homepage:
http://www.scc.csc.gc.ca/welcome/index_e.asp
Reported Decisions of the Supreme Court 1983 to Present:
http://scc.lexum.unmontreal.ca/en/index.htm
Canadian Legal information Institute (a search engine for reported court cases in all Canadian jurisdictions).
http://www.canlii.org/en/index.html
Osgoode Hall Law School sponsored blog containing commentaries on and discussions of Supreme Court decisions:
http://www.thecourt.ca/
Centre for Constitutional Studies: Focuses on the interdisciplinary study of constitutional matters.
http://www.law.ualberta.ca/centres/ccs
Course Requirements:
Attendance and Participation %15)
Take-Home Exam May 24 %25)
Case Commentary June 5 %30
Final Exam Examination Period %30)--- Is not Cumulative
Lecture and Reading Schedule;
Week 1- Introduction to the Course
The Evolution of Human Rights in Canada and Pre-charter protection of Civil Liberties. The Bill of Rights and Provincial Human Rights
Required Readings:
Roach, Ch 1, Ch2
Dominque Clement and Daniel Torttier. The Evolution of Human Rights in Canada. Human Right Commission: Minister of Public Works and Government Services 2012. http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/sites/default/files/ehrc_edpc-eng.pdf
Civil Rights in Canada During the Pre-Charter Era
Draft Chapter 1 of Ian Greene, The Charter of Rights, 2nd ed. (Toronto: Lorimer, ~2010). (Can be accessed electronically)
Suggested;
Hogg, Chapter 34, Hogg, Chapter 35
Week 2: The Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Application and Interpretation of the Charter
Required Reading:
Roach, Ch 3, Ch 6, Ch 7
Suggested:
Hogg, Chapter 36, Hogg, Chapter 37 and Chapter 38.1-38.12
R.v. Oakes, [1986]
Charter’s Critics, Limitation of Rights
Required Readings:
Roach, Ch 4 , Ch 5,
Suggested:
Hogg, Chapter 38 and Chapter 39
Richard Sigurdson. “Left and Right Wing Chaterphobia in Canada.” International Journal of Canadian Studies, 7-8 (spring/fall), 1993, pp. 95-115
Peter Hogg and Allison Russell. “The Charter Dialogue between Courts and the Legislatures.” Osgood Hall Law Journal. 35:1 (1997). http://www.ohlj.ca/archive/articles/35_1_hogg_bushell.pdf
Week 3: Freedom of Religion;
Required Readings:
Roach, Ch 8
Suggested:
Hogg, Ch 42
Freedom of Expression
Required Readings:
Roach, Ch 9
Suggested:
Hogg, Chapter 43
Freedom of Assembly and Association; Democratic Rights
Required Readings:
Roach, Ch 10, ch 11,
Suggested:
Hogg, Chapter 44, Chapter 45
Week 4: Fundamental Justice: Legal rights;
Required Readings:
Roach, Ch 13, Ch 14
Suggested:
Hogg, Chapter 47,
Equality Rights
Required Readings:
Roach, Ch 15
Suggested:
Hogg, Chapter 55
Week 5: Language Rights and Mobility Rights
Required Readings:
Roach, Ch 12, Ch 16
Aboriginal Rights
Required Readings:
Hogg, Chapter 28
Murphy, Michael, “Culture and Court: A New Direction in Canadian Jurisprudence on Aboriginal Rights?” Canadian Journal of Political Science, 34 (2001), pp.109-129.
Week 6: Administrative Law and Judicial Remedies
Roach ch 17
Exam Review
Written Assignment: Case Study or Case Comment
The written assignment for this course consists of a case comment on a chosen topic drawn from a list provided below. Topics that are not specified in the list will not be accepted unless the preferred case receives the approval of course director .The written assignment is worth 30% of the final grade. The expected length of this written assignment is roughly 6-7 pages. No extensions are allowed except under exceptional circumstances. Late papers will lose 2% of its grade for each day.
Case study is an extended commentary on a particular court case. The aim is to assess not only how a particular case was decided by the court, but also to analyze the implications of the ruling. The case comment is, therefore, an interpretative essay which focuses on specific court case but is not restricted to a simple exposition of its details.
Organizational Structure of a case comment:
Even though there is no established set of rules on how to write a case comment, the following suggestions might be useful;
1-Introduce the case (specifying your rationale behind selecting the case). Identify the problem or problems and state your thesis statement. Your thesis statement must be sharp, concise and comprehensive.
2-Outline the main legal issues and questions.
3-Survey the development of law in this particular area and discuss the main issues raised by the case.
4-Interpret the judicial ruling on the case (you should look at courts’ rulings on cases similar to this case. Elaborate on consistency or inconsistency of judicial rulings on cases relevant to the area under investigation).
5-Conclusion; recapitulate main points and reflect on the implications of the case.
In researching your paper, you should read not only court cases but academic analyses of these court cases. While there are no established rules on how many references are adequate to an exercise like this, it would be prudent to refer to at least 3 academic sources in addition to the cases you will cite. Helpful information on how to research legal literature can be found in Castle and Latch man, The Practical Guide to Canadian Legal Research.
Accommodation for Disability:
Students with disabilities who require adaptations or services must discuss their needs with the instructor. Accommodation for disability must be arranged in conjunction with the Office for Persons with Disability.
Plagiarism:
Plagiarism is generally considered to be the most serious academic misconduct that a student can commit. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, instances of plagiarism will have serious academic consequences. In order to avoid slipping into the realm of plagiarism, students are advised to familiarize themselves with York University’s definition of academic dishonesty.
Reappraisals
For petition and reappraisal procedures and information, visit the Senate’s website at http://calendars.registrar.yorku.ca/2012-2013/policies/petitions/
Court Cases:
Religious Freedom;
R. v. N.S. (2012)
Young v. Young (1993)
Multani v. Commission Scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys (2006)
Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem (2004)
Adler v. Ontario (1996)
Freedom of Expression:
R.v. Zundel (1992)
R.v. Sharpe (2001)
R.v. Butler (1992)
Freedom of Association:
Dummore v. Ontario (2001)
Health Services Bargaining Assn. v. B.C (2007)
Lavigne v.Ontario Public Service Employees Union (1991)
Fundamental Justice:
Morgentaler. V.The Queen (1988)
Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1985)
Chaoulli v. Quebec (2005)
Gosselin v. Quebec (Attorney General, 2002)
Equality Rights;
Andrews v. law Society of B.C. (1989)
Vriend v. Alberta, [1989]
Egan et al.v. The Queen, (1995)
Nova Scotia. v. Walsh (2002)
Law v. Canada (1999)
R.v. Kapp (2008)
Aboriginal Rights:
R.v. Sparrow (1990)
R.v. Pamajewon (1996)
R. v. Van der Peet (1996)
R.V. Sappier (2006)
Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia (2014)
1