 |
 |
|||
Canadian Constitution FoundationEducation InitiativesOur Education Initiatives serve as a means to help all Canadians understand their constitutional freedom. With this knowledge, Canadians will find themselves in a better position to know when their individual freedoms, economic liberty or equality before the law are being threatened by government. Our education projects include studies and reports published in-house, as well as commentary published in local and national media.
 The Right that Dares not Speak its NameCanadian Constitution Foundation, January 28, 2010
Canadians seem to attach different connotations to the phrase “human rights” depending upon the geographical location of the events being discussed.
When we talk about human rights in Third World countries, we often mean something quite dramatic: the rights not to be silenced, arbitrarily imprisoned, tortured or even murdered by one’s own government. For instance, many Canadians urged our government throughout the decade 2000-2009 to raise with Chinese leaders the forced harvesting of donor organs from imprisoned members of the Falun Gong sect, currently a prominent blotch on China’s human rights record.
Is 'Inherent Aboriginal Self-Government' Constitutional
Canadian Constitution Foundation, January 13, 2010
This legal position paper argues that a constitutionally valid form of aboriginal self-government may be created through federal legislation that delegates government powers and authority to an aboriginal community. This has been done successfully with the Sechelt Indian Band Self-Government Act, the Yukon First Nation Self-Government Act, and the Cree-Naskapi (of Quebec) Act. The delegation of federal and provincial powers enables aboriginals to use municipal-style government to run their own affairs, exercise their aboriginal rights, and use aboriginal title lands.
A 'seismic shift'? Most certainlyJohn Carpay and Jeffrey K. Rustand National Post, June 8, 2009
Shortly before his re-election, B. C. Premier Gordon Campbell backed away from his controversial plan to give aboriginal peoples de facto control over the province's land and resources. But a fresh mandate from voters will likely have the Premier trying to revive the plan, which was announced in the government's Throne Speech in February.
What about presumption of innocence?Calgary Herald, April 24, 2009
According to the Supreme Court of Canada, it's OK for the provincial government to confiscate a citizen's property on mere suspicion that the property might be the proceeds of crime. In Chatterjee v. Ontario, the Court declared that provincial governments may seize and keep citizens' property without needing to prove that a crime was committed by the property owner, and without even having to show that any crime was committed at all. Police suspicion - whether well-founded or without basis - is all that's needed for taking away a person's money or other possessions, after which the onus shifts to the citizen to try to get her or his property back.
Campbell's plan for aboriginal title could turn into a complete messVancouver Sun, March 27, 2009
Premier Gordon Campbell wishes to perform an experiment, to accomplish a politico-legal makeover unparalleled in Canada's history which will, in the words of a government official, be a "seismic shift" for us all. The experiment was illuminated earlier this month in a joint discussion paper of the province and the First Nations Leadership Council that revealed the Campbell government's intention to introduce a Recognition and Reconciliation bill, a bill not yet released to the public.
If you wish to make a donation in support of our education initiatives, papers, publications and other research projects Click Here. |
||||
 |
 |
|||
 |
|
