Suchergebnisse

The paper examines the recent case of R. v. Bryan, in which the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the constitutionality of section 329 of the Canada Elections Act (a provision that prohibits the premature transmission of election results from one electoral district to another before the close of polling stations). The Court found that the provision breaches the freedom of expression right contained in section 2(a) of the Charter, but that it is saved by section 1. The paper argues that the decision ignores the practical realities of new media and technologies, and the Court's own appreciation of these trends contained in some of its recent precedents. It the n explores the nature of section 1 analysis in this context, suggesting possible reforms of the Oakes test to address the influence of technology on legal rights.

The decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in Harper v. Canada was not favourable to Stephen Harper. In a split decision, the Court held that the latest federal campaign spending limits were acceptable. This paper briefly examines the recent history of election financing laws in Canada and looks briefly at three distinct aspects of the Harper decision: The irony of Stephen Harper's position in the case, evidential and conceptual problems associated with equating commercial speech with political speech, and an examination of whether financial restraints are of declining importance in an era where political influence is more subtly obtained. The paper argues that the Court needs to critically examine the role and efficacy of advertising in the 21st century, and that governments need to understand political influences other than in simple monetary terms and review policy options in this light.

In 1993, the Supreme Court of Canada was asked to decide on the constitutional legitimacy of legislation prohibiting all prisoners from voting in federal elections. Given that the case ended up in our highest court, the parties must have considered it a fairly thorny problem to resolve. Apparently they were mistaken. In a mere 95 words, fewer than the average grade two writing assignment, the Court pronounced that the solution should have been obvious. Here is the judgment in its entirety: We are all of the view that these appeals should be dismissed. The Attorney General of Canada has properly conceded that s. 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. E-2, contravenes s. 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms but submits that s. 51(e) is saved under s. 1 of the Charter. We do not agree. In our view, s. 51(e) is drawn too broadly and fails to meet the proportionality test, particularly the minimal impairment component of the test, as expressed in the s. 1 jurisprudence of the Court. Cut to 2002, almost 10 years later, and the Court is faced with virtually the same problem. This time, however, the legislation has been tinkered with.Instead of applying to all prisoners, the new legislative provision denies the right to vote in federal elections only for prisoners serving sentences of two years or greater. The federal government maintains that the new version is valid. Again, it is Richard Sauvé who is the lead challenger. The case is indexed as Sauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer). I imagine someone like Stephen Spielberg calling it The Neverending Return of Sauvé. Just like the plot in a movie sequel, the decision has mushroomed into something much more cumbersome and less likely to entertain. Two lengthy judgments, split 5-4, highlight the complexity. The Chief Justice, speaking on behalf of Arbour, Binnie, Iacobucci, and LeBel JJ., found the legislation remained unconstitutional. Justice Gonthier, carrying Bastarache, L'Heureux-Dubé, and Major JJ., thought it was now a reasonable limit and so saved by section 1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Sauvé (No. 2) provides an excellent example of how judgments are as much essays about our time as they are legal decisions. Rather than concentrating on a critical diagnosis of the judgments, this paper, in the manner of Marshall McLuhan's "probes," instead makes a number of observations about the case: the growing rift amongst Court members that is played out both linguistically and rhetorically; the dialogue metaphor in a new guise; public opinion and media representation of the Court; the growing moral and ethical relativism of section 1 analysis; and finally, a look at broader questions about voting and the nature of rights-based litigation. Framing these discussions and providing a counterpoint to the gravitas of the Supreme Court decision are short excerpts from the Special Committee on Electoral Reform that was given the task in 1992 to deal with a number of electoral issues, including whether prisoners should have voting rights.

PurposeThe impact of disasters caused by natural hazards on people in affected communities is mediated by a whole range of circumstances such as the intensity of the disaster, type and nature of the community affected and the nature of loss and displacement. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the need to adopt a holistic or integrated approach to assessment of the process of disaster recovery, and to develop a multidimensional assessment framework.Design/methodology/approachThe study is designed as a novel qualitative assessment of the recovery process using qualitative data collection techniques from a sample of communities affected by the Indian Ocean tsunami in Eastern and Southern Sri Lanka.FindingsThe outcomes of the interventions have varied widely depending on such factors as the nature of the community, the nature of the intervention and the mode of delivery for donor support. The surveyed communities are ranked in terms of the nature and extent of recovery.Practical implicationsThe indices of recovery developed constitute a convenient tool of measurement of effectiveness and limitations of external interventions. The assessment used is multidimensional and socially inclusive.Originality/valueThe approach adopted is new to post-disaster recovery assessments and is useful for monitoring and evaluation of recovery processes. It also fits into the social accountability model as the assessment is based on community experience with the recovery process.

In "Charter Dialogue Revisited-Or 'Much Ado About Metaphors,"' it is noted that the original idea behind the dialogue metaphor was simply to describe Canada's constitutional structure. Despite this, the metaphor has been criticized for having normative content and influencing courts and legislatures. In this commentary, the authors analyze all Supreme Court of Canada and lower court uses of the dialogue metaphor and conclude that, with some exceptions, the courts have employed the metaphor properly, i.e., descriptively. Since, however, the metaphor can be misapplied-used other than to describe or explain the relationship between the courts and legislatures in Canada-the authors recommend ending its use in judicial decisions.

The authors look at the Supreme Court's latest fully reasoned decision on independence in Canadian Pacific v. Matsqui, where native tribunals were found to be biased because of certain institutional characteristics. The authors argue that the court employs, on the one hand, a very simplified analysis of independence, but at the same time, sets standards for testing independence and bias in tribunals that are impossible to adequately quantify in practice. Neither the reasoning of Lamer C.J, nor Sopinka J. is adequate to address the full range of tribunal experience; in fact, the Supreme Court examines administrative tribunals as if they were simply smaller courts, without recognizing their inhere/If differences. Subsequent cases on this point have failed to take into account the differences in these opinions. The authors conclude by noting the complexity of issues regarding bias, such as institutional independence, and question the direction of Canadian jurisprudence in this area.

Financing intangible intellectual property in Canada presents some novel demands on lenders because of the interaction of provincial security schemes with federal intellectual property legislation. This article looks at the relative ease with which security interests in intangible property may be obtained under provincial personal property security regimes, and then at the various federal intellectual property statutes which exhibit more of a piecemeal approach to financing. In addition, a number of constitutional issues arise because of this jurisdictional split, and the article explores these issues, comparing the situation in Canada with that in the United States. The article suggests that unless legislative reform occurs, a cautious and pragmatic approach to securing intangible assets in Canada is warranted.

Cover -- The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on public engagement approaches to disaster preparedness for foreign residents: case of Tokyo Metropolitan Area, Japan -- Systems thinking approach for disaster resilient and climate smart agriculture in Bangladesh -- Sustainable management of coastal critical infrastructure: case study of multi-purpose cyclone shelters in South Asia -- How embankment influences coastal livelihood in the context of climate adaptation - a case study of Indian Sundarban Delta -- Conjoint assessment of rural water security and system sustainability in Nagpur, India -- Addressing housing needs of the displaced people promoting resilient and sustainable communities -- Waterlogging mitigation and safe water supply: lessons learnt from low-lying areas of Basirhat municipality, India -- Assessment and appraisal of local governance on urban flood resilience in Bangkok Metropolitan Region: perspectives of SDGs 11 and 13.