Revision as of 03:56, 21 October 2023 editHTGS (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,620 edits Simple copy edits, mostly capital letters, in line with MOS:INSTITUTIONSTag: Visual edit← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:10, 5 January 2025 edit undoMoxy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors129,893 edits →Disability | ||
(322 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|none}} | {{Short description|none}} | ||
{{Canadian |
{{Use Canadian English|date=November 2024}} | ||
{{Use mdy dates|date=November 2024}} | |||
'''Human rights in Canada''' have come under increasing public attention and legal protection since ]. Prior to that time, there were few legal protections for ]. The protections which did exist focused on specific issues, rather than taking a general approach to human rights. | |||
{{if mobile|] often simply referred to as the ''Charter'' in Canada, is a ] ] in the ]]]|{{Canadian human rights sidebar}}}} | |||
The current legal framework for the protection of human rights in Canada consists of constitutional entitlements, and statutory human rights codes, both federal and provincial. The constitutional foundation of the modern Canadian human rights system is the ], which is part of the Constitution of Canada. Before 1982, there was little direct constitutional protection against government interference with human rights, although provincial and federal laws did provide some protection for human rights enforceable against government and private parties. Today, the charter guarantees fundamental freedoms (free expression, religion, association and peaceful assembly), democratic rights (such as participation in elections), mobility rights, legal rights, equality rights, and language rights. | |||
'''Human rights in Canada''' have come under increasing public attention and legal protection since ]. Inspired by Canada's involvement in the creation of the ] in 1948,<ref>{{cite journal |title=Canada and the Adoption of Universal Declaration of Human Rights |last=Schabas |first=William |journal=McGill Law Journal |page=403 |volume=43 |year=1998 |url =https://lawjournal.mcgill.ca/wp-content/uploads/pdf/5890478-43.Schabas.pdf}}</ref> the current legal framework for ] in Canada consists of ], and statutory human rights codes, both ] and ]. | |||
] first recognized an ] in 1938 in the decision ].<ref name=magnet>Joseph E. Magnet, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071008084158/http://www.constitutional-law.net/chartersample.html |date=October 8, 2007 }}, Juriliber, Edmonton (2001). URL accessed on March 18, 2006.</ref> However, prior to the advent of the '']'' in 1960 and its successor the '']'' in 1982 (part of the ]), the laws of Canada did not provide much in the way of ] and was typically of limited concern to the courts.<ref name="ChurchSchulze2007">{{cite book|first1=Joan|last1=Church|first2=Christian|last2=Schulze|first3=Hennie|last3=Strydom|title=Human rights from a comparative and international law perspective|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2sMwFTOrixwC&pg=PA82|year= 2007|publisher=Unisa Press|isbn=978-1-86888-361-5|page=82}}</ref> The protections which did exist focused on specific issues, rather than taking a general approach to human rights with some provincial and federal laws offering limited safeguards. | |||
Controversial human rights issues in Canada have included ], ], ], ], parents' rights, ], ] vs ], ], majority rights, ], ], ] and economic, social and political rights.<ref> {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081203171021/http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/pdp-hrp/canada/themes_e.cfm |date=December 3, 2008 }}</ref> | |||
Since the 1960s, Canada has placed emphasis on equality and inclusiveness for all people.<ref name="MacLennan2004sad">{{cite book|author=Christopher MacLennan|title=Toward the Charter: Canadians and the Demand for a National Bill of Rights, 1929–1960|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xxt6VAsdW5oC&pg=PA119|year=2004|publisher=McGill-Queen's Press – MQUP|isbn=978-0-7735-2536-8|page=119}}</ref><ref name="Bumsted2003">{{cite book|author=J. M. Bumsted|title=Canada's Diverse Peoples: A Reference Sourcebook|url=https://archive.org/details/canadasdiversepe0000bums|url-access=registration|date= 2003|publisher=ABC-CLIO|isbn=978-1-57607-672-9|page=}}</ref> In present-day Canada the idea of a "]" are constitutionally protected.<ref name="x717">{{cite book | last=LaSelva | first=S.V. | title=The Moral Foundations of Canadian Federalism: Paradoxes, Achievements, and Tragedies of Nationhood | publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press | year=1996 | isbn=978-0-7735-1422-5 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rcqMl9MK_x0C&pg=PA86 | access-date=November 2, 2024 | page=86}}</ref> The "Canadian Charter" guarantees fundamental freedoms such as; ] and ].<ref name="v420a"/> Other rights related to ], ], ], ], ] and ] are also within the Charter.<ref name="v420a">{{cite web | title=The rights and freedoms the Charter protects | website=Ministère de la Justice | date=Apr 12, 2018 | url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/rfcp-cdlp.html | access-date=Nov 3, 2024}}</ref> | |||
== History == | |||
{{further|Slavery in Canada}} | |||
Internationally, Canada is a signatory to multiple human rights treaties,<ref name="o751">{{cite web | title=International Human Rights Treaties to which Canada is a Party | website=Ministère de la Justice | date=November 14, 2016 | url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/abt-apd/icg-gci/ihrl-didp/tcp.html | access-date=2024-10-29}}</ref> and ] of ].<ref name="z574">{{cite web | title=Canada: Freedom in the World 2023 Country Report | website=Freedom House | url=https://freedomhouse.org/country/canada/freedom-world/2023 | access-date=November 3, 2024}}</ref><ref name="s701">{{cite web | last=Amanat | first=Hayatullah | title=Canada ranks as 2nd-best country in 2023: U.S. News | website=CTVNews | date=Sep 8, 2023 | url=https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/canada-ranks-as-second-best-country-in-the-world-in-2023-u-s-news-1.6554229 | access-date=November 3, 2024}}</ref> Despite Canada being an international leader of human rights there are foreign and varied domestic concerns.<ref name="x688">{{cite web | title=World Report 2020: Rights Trends in Canada | website=Human Rights Watch | date=December 13, 2019 | url=https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2020/country-chapters/canada | access-date=October 28, 2024}}</ref><ref name="c127">{{cite web | title=Canada "a welcome ally" in advancing human rights around the world – Bachelet | website=OHCHR | date=June 19, 2019 | url=https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2019/06/canada-welcome-ally-advancing-human-rights-around-world-bachelet | access-date=October 28, 2024}}</ref> There are significant issue of historic ] - including the modern day plight of ], reports of ] and ], concern with the ] and the ]. | |||
=== Colonial period === | |||
== Current legal framework == | |||
The first legal protection for human rights in Canada related to religious freedom. The ''Articles of Capitulation'' of the town of Quebec, negotiated between the French and British military commanders after the fall of Quebec in 1759, provided a guarantee of "the free exercise of the Roman religion" until the possession of Canada was determined by the British and French governments.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.42695/6?r=0&s=1|title=A collection of the acts passed in the Parliame... - Canadiana Online|website=www.canadiana.ca}}</ref> A similar guarantee was included in the ''Articles of Capitulation'' of Montreal the next year.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.42695/10?r=0&s=1|title=A collection of the acts passed in the Parliame... - Canadiana Online|website=www.canadiana.ca}}</ref> The two guarantees were formally confirmed by Britain in the '']'',<ref>.</ref> and then given statutory protection in the '']''.<ref name = QuebecAct>{{Cite web|url=https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/quebec_act_1774.asp|title=Avalon Project - Great Britain : Parliament - The Quebec Act: October 7, 1774|website=avalon.law.yale.edu}}</ref> The result was that the British subjects in Quebec had greater guarantees of religious liberty at that time than did the Roman Catholic inhabitants of Great Britain and Ireland, who would not receive similar guarantees until ] in 1829.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://members.pcug.org.au/~ppmay/acts/relief_act_1829.htm|title=THE CATHOLIC RELIEF ACT, 1829|website=members.pcug.org.au}}</ref> | |||
{{see|Law of Canada}} | |||
Human rights in Canada are given legal protections by the dual mechanisms of constitutional entitlements and statutory human rights codes, both federal and provincial.<ref name="t313">Nancy Holmes, , Publications Canada, Law and Government Division, BP-279E, November 1991, revised October 2001.</ref><ref name="c275">{{cite web | last= Canadian Heritage | title=About human rights | website=Canada.ca | date=October 23, 2017 | url=https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/about-human-rights.html | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
Nearly a century later, the ] passed similar legislation, ending the ] of the ] in the province, and recognizing instead the principle of "legal equality among all religious denominations". The act provided that the "free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship" was protected by the Constitution and laws of the Province.<ref>''An Act to repeal so much of the Act of the Parliament of Great Britain passed in the Thirty-first year of the Reign of King George the Third, and Chaptered Thirty-one, as relates to Rectories, and the presentation of Incumbents to the same, and for other purposes connected with such Rectories'', Statutes of the Province of Canada, 14-15 Vict. (1851), c. 175, Preamble and s. 1.</ref> | |||
Claims under the Constitution and under human rights laws are generally of a civil nature. Constitutional claims are adjudicated through the court system. Human rights claims are typically investigated by a human rights commission of the appropriate jurisdiction, either the ] or a provincial human rights commission. If a human rights claim goes to adjudication, it may be in front of a specialised human rights tribunal, such as the ] for federal claims, or a provincial human rights tribunal for claims under provincial law. In one province, Saskatchewan, there is no human rights tribunal and claims are adjudicated directly by the superior trial court of the province.<ref> Marie-Yosie Saint-Cyr, , ''Slaw – Canada’s online legal magazine'', August 4, 2011.</ref><ref></ref> A tribunal or court generally has broad remedial powers.<ref name="x828">{{cite web | last=Canadian Heritage | title=About human rights complaints | website=Canada.ca | date=October 23, 2017 | url=https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/human-rights-complaints/about.html | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
=== Confederation and onwards === | |||
=== Constitutional provisions === | |||
{{main|Constitution of Canada}} | |||
] | |||
The '']'' is part of the ].<ref name = Charter>.</ref> The Charter guarantees political, mobility, and equality rights and fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion for private individuals and some organisations.<ref name="v420">{{cite web | title=The rights and freedoms the Charter protects | website=Department of Justice Canada | date=April 12, 2018 | url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/rfcp-cdlp.html | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> The Charter only applies to governments, requiring them to respect the rights and freedoms it sets out.<ref name="a639">{{cite web | title=Who Does the Charter Apply to? | website=Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre | url=https://www.aclrc.com/who-does-the-charter-apply-to | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> Charter rights are enforced by legal actions in the criminal and civil courts, depending on the context in which a Charter claim arises.<ref name="n088">{{cite web | title=Section 11 – General: legal rights apply to those "charged with an offence" | website=Ministère de la Justice | date=November 9, 1999 | url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art11.html | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
In 1867, ] was created by the '']'' (now named the ''Constitution Act, 1867'').<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-1.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=July 30, 2015|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> In keeping with British constitutional traditions, the act did not include an entrenched list of rights, other than specific rights relating to language use in legislatures and courts,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-7.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=July 30, 2015|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> and provisions protecting the right of certain religious minorities to establish their own separate and denominational schools.<ref name="s93">{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-4.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=July 30, 2015|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> Canadian law instead followed the British constitutional approach in which the (unenumerated) "]" had traditionally been defended by all the branches of the government (Parliament, the courts, and the Crown) collectively and sometimes in competition with each other. However, 20th century political and legal thought also emphasized the importance of ] and property rights as important aspects of liberty and the rule of law. This approach meant that what are now viewed as human rights concerns, based on personal circumstances, would be considered of lesser importance than contractual and property rights. | |||
==== Fundamental freedoms ==== | |||
Human rights issues in the first seventy years of Canadian history thus tended to be raised in the framework of the constitutional ] between the federal and provincial governments. A person who was affected by a provincial law could challenge that law in the courts, arguing that it intruded on a matter reserved for the federal government. Alternatively, a person who was affected by federal law could challenge it in court, arguing that it intruded on a matter reserved for the provinces. In either case, the focus was primarily on the constitutional authority of the federal and provincial governments, not on the rights of the individual. | |||
] guarantees four fundamental freedoms: | |||
* freedom of conscience and religion; | |||
The division of powers is also the reason that the term "civil rights" is not used in Canada in the same way as it is used in other countries, such as the United States. One of the main areas of provincial jurisdiction is "Property and civil rights",<ref name="s93"/> which is a broad phrase used to encompass all of what is normally termed the ], such as contracts, property, torts/delicts, family law, wills, estates and successions and so on. This use of the phrase dates back to the ''Quebec Act, 1774''.<ref name = QuebecAct/> Given the broad, established meaning of "civil rights" in Canadian constitutional law, it has not been used in the more specific meaning of personal equality rights. Instead, the terms "human rights" / "droits de la personne" are used. | |||
*freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; | |||
==== Early cases ==== | |||
*freedom of peaceful assembly; | |||
===== ''Union Colliery Co. v. Bryden'' (1899) ===== | |||
*freedom of association. | |||
In '']'' a shareholder of Union Colliery Co. accused the company of violating the ''Coal Mines Regulation Act''. That law had been passed by the ] of ] and prohibited the hiring of people of Chinese origin, using an ] in the legislation.<ref>''Coal Mines Regulation Act'', RSBC 1897, c. 138, s. 4.</ref> The company successfully challenged the constitutionality of the act on the grounds that it dealt with a matter of exclusive federal jurisdiction, namely "Naturalization and Aliens".<ref></nowiki> UKPC 58], AC 580 (JCPC).</ref><ref name="s93"/> In reaching this conclusion, the ], at that time the highest court for the ], found that evidence which had been led at trial about the reliability and compentence of the Chinese employees of the colliery was irrelevant to the constitutional issue. The personal circumstances and ability of those employees did not relate to the issue of federal and provincial jurisdiction. | |||
===== |
===== Freedom of conscience and religion ===== | ||
{{Main|Freedom of religion in Canada|Separate school}} | |||
] | |||
Freedom of conscience and religion is protected by ] of the Charter.<ref>.</ref> Religious freedom is further protected by section 15 of the Charter, which promotes the pursuance of equality and the freedom from discrimination under enumerated or analogous grounds, one of which is religion.<ref name=Charter15>.</ref> | |||
In a 1985 Supreme Court case, ''].,'' Chief Justice ] said that religious freedom in Canada includes freedom of religious speech, including "the right to entertain such religious beliefs as a person chooses, the right to declare religious beliefs openly and without fear of hindrance or reprisal, and the right to manifest religious belief by worship and practice or by teaching and dissemination."<ref></nowiki> 1 SCR 295], at para. 94.</ref> | |||
The decision in ''Union Colliery'' did not establish any general principle of equality based on race or ethnicity. In each case, the issue of race or ethnicity was simply one fact the courts took into account in determining if a matter was within federal or provincial jurisdiction. For example, just three years later, in the case of ], a provincial law prohibiting people of Chinese, Japanese or Indian descent from voting in provincial elections was held to be constitutional.<ref>''Provincial Elections Act'', RSBC 1897, c. 67, s. 8.</ref> The Judicial Committee rejected a challenge to the provincial law brought by a naturalized Japanese-Canadian, ], who had been denied the right to vote in British Columbia provincial elections. The Judicial Committee held that control of the ] in provincial elections came within the province's exclusive jurisdiction to legislate with respect to the constitution of the province. Again, the personal circumstances of the individual, in this case whether naturalised or native-born, were not relevant to the issue of the constitutional authority of the province. There was no inherent right to vote.<ref>''Cunningham v Homma'', </nowiki> UKPC 60], 9 AC 151 (JCPC).</ref> | |||
Concerns with regards to religious freedom remain with respect to public funding of religious education in some provinces,<ref>Richard Moon, , ''CBC News'', 28 May 2018.</ref> public interest limitations of religious freedom,<ref>Cristin Schmitz, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221204215721/https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/6748/scc-affirms-7-2-ontario-and-b-c-regulators-denial-of-accreditation-to-twu-s-proposed-law-school |date=December 4, 2022 }}, ''The Lawyer's Daily'', LexisNexis Canada, 15 June 2018.</ref> state religious neutrality and religious dress,<ref>Canadian Human Rights Commission Statement: , 29 March 2019: "The Canadian Human Rights Commission is deeply concerned by Quebec’s announcement this week that it will seek to ban religious symbols for all provincial public servants in roles such as, police officers, judges, teachers and senior officials."</ref> and conflicts between anti-discrimination law and religiously motivated discrimination.<ref>Kathleen Harris, , ''CBC News'', 16 June 2018.</ref> | |||
===== ''Quong Wing v R'' (1914) ===== | |||
Three provinces, Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, are constitutionally required to operate ]. The Supreme Court has held that the funding is not discriminatory under the Charter.<ref> </nowiki> 1 SCR 1148].</ref><ref> </nowiki> 3 SCR 609].</ref> On November 5, 1999, the ] held that Canada was in breach of the equality provisions of the ].<ref></ref> The Committee restated its concerns on November 2, 2005, observing that Canada had failed to "adopt steps in order to eliminate discrimination on the basis of religion in the funding of schools in Ontario."<ref>UN Human Rights Committee, ''Report of the Human Rights Committee, Volume I: Eighty-fifth Session (17 October-3 November 2005), Eighty-sixth Session (13-31 March 2006), Eighty-seventh Session (10-28 July 2006),'' 85th Sess, UN DOC A/61/40 (1 December 2006) 20 at 24.</ref> | |||
] | |||
===== Freedom of expression ===== | |||
Similarly, in the case of '']'', the Supreme Court upheld a ] law which prohibited businesses owned by anyone of Japanese, Chinese or other East Asian background from hiring any "white woman or girl" to work in the business.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/9673/index.do|title=Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search|first=Supreme Court of|last=Canada|date=January 1, 2001|website=scc-csc.lexum.com}}</ref><ref>''An Act to prevent the Employment of Female Labour in Certain Circumstances'', Statutes of Saskatchewan 1912, c. 17, s. 1.</ref> The court, by a 4–1 majority, found that the province had jurisdiction over businesses and employment, or alternatively that the law in question was in relation to local public morality, another area of provincial jurisdiction.<ref name="s93"/> The judges in the majority acknowledged that the law had an effect on some Canadians based on their race or ethnic origins, but that was not sufficient to take the case outside of provincial jurisdiction. The dissenting judge, Justice ], was the only one who would have struck down the statute, but as in the other cases, he based his conclusion on the division of powers, not on the rights of the individual. He would have held that the provincial act limited the statutory rights granted by the federal ''Naturalization Act'', and was therefore beyond provincial jurisdiction. | |||
{{Main|Freedom of speech in Canada|Freedom_of_the_press#Canada|l2 = Freedom of the press in Canada}} | |||
Freedom of expression is protected by ] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' which guarantees "Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication."<ref></ref> Freedom of speech and expression has constitutional protection in Canada but is not absolute. ] of the charter allows limitations on this freedom if it can be "justified in a free and democratic society".<ref></ref> The Charter protection works to ensure that all such limits are reasonable and strictly necessary. The approach by the Supreme Court on free expression has been that in deciding whether a restriction on freedom of expression is justified, the harms done by the particular form of expression must be weighed against the harm that would be done by the restriction itself.<ref>Julian Walker, "Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression: Legal Boundaries in Canada", ''Library of Parliament Research Publications,'' No. 2018-25-E, Library of Parliament, 2018.</ref> | |||
In Canada, legal limitations on freedom of expression include: | |||
===== ''Christie v York Corporation'' (1940) ===== | |||
* Sedition, fraud, specific threats of violence, and disclosure of classified information | |||
Canadian courts also upheld discrimination in public places based on freedom of contract and property rights. For example, in '']'',<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/8489/index.do|title=Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search|first=Supreme Court of|last=Canada|date=January 1, 2001|website=scc-csc.lexum.com}}</ref> the plaintiff, a black man, was denied service at a bar at the ]. He sued for damages, arguing that the tavern was under a duty to provide services to all members of the public. The case reached the Supreme Court, which held by a 4–1 majority that the owner of the business had complete freedom of commerce and could refuse service to whomever it wished, on whatever grounds it wished. The lone dissenter, ], would have held that the Quebec statute regulating liquor sales to the public required restaurants to provide their service to all customers, without discrimination. | |||
* Civil offences involving ], ], or ] | |||
* Violations of ] | |||
* Criminal offences involving ] | |||
* Municipal by-laws that regulate signage or where protests may take place | |||
Some limitations remain controversial due to concerns that they infringe on freedom of expression. | |||
===== ''The King v Desmond'' (1946) ===== | |||
===== Freedom of peaceful assembly ===== | |||
] | |||
Freedom of peaceful assembly is protected by ] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' guarantees to all Canadians freedom of peaceful assembly.<ref>.</ref> In 1987, the Supreme Court found in ''],'' that although being written as a separate right, section 2(c) was closely related to freedom of expression.<ref></nowiki> 1 SCR 313.]</ref> | |||
Recent controversies involving concerns about freedom of assembly in Canada include the eviction of Occupy Canada's protests from public parks in 2011,<ref>Vilko Žbogar, et al. "Forcible Removal of Peaceful Protests in Canada: Submission to United Nations, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression." The Law Union of Ontario, November 18. 2011.</ref> the possible effects of Bill C-51 on freedom of assembly,<ref>Alexandra Theodorakidis, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220630233337/https://www.cjfe.org/bill_c_51_freedom_of_assembly_and_canadians_ability_to_protest |date=June 30, 2022 }} ''Canadian Journalists for Free Expression'', 25 June 2015.</ref> and CSIS surveillance of environmental and indigenous activists.<ref>, ''CBC News'', September 27, 2018.</ref> | |||
], a ], went to see a movie in a theatre in ], Nova Scotia. The owner of the theatre would only allow white people to sit on the main floor. Non-whites had to sit in the gallery. Desmond, who was from out of town, did not know of the policy. She bought a ticket for the movie and went onto the main floor. When the theatre employees told her to go to the gallery, she refused. The police were called and she was forcibly removed. Desmond spent a night in jail and was fined $20, on the basis that by sitting on the main floor when her ticket was for the gallery, she had deprived the provincial government of the additional tax for the main floor ticket: one cent. She sought to challenge her treatment, by an application for ] of the tax ruling. The court dismissed the challenge on the basis that the tax statute was neutral with respect to race. The judge suggested in his decision that the outcome might have been different if she had instead appealed the conviction, on the basis that the law was being used improperly by the theatre owner to enforce a "]" type of segregation.<ref>''The King v Desmond'' (1947), 20 MPR 297 (NS SC), at 299–301.</ref> | |||
===== Freedom of association ===== | |||
In 2018, the ] announced that Viola Desmond would be the person shown on the new ten-dollar note.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.bankofcanada.ca/banknotes/vertical10/|title=Canada's Vertical $10 Note|website=www.bankofcanada.ca}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/our-family-will-go-down-in-history-desmond-s-sister-moved-by-new-10-bill-1.3833870|title='Our family will go down in history': Desmond's sister moved by new $10 bill|first=Jeff|last=Lagerquist|date=March 8, 2018|website=CTVNews}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.historicacanada.ca/content/heritage-minutes/viola-desmond|title=Viola Desmond | Historica Canada|website=www.historicacanada.ca}}</ref> | |||
Freedom of association is protected by ]) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.''<ref>.</ref> This section provides Canadians the right to establish, belong to and maintain to any sort of organization unless that organization is otherwise illegal. This right only protects the right of individuals to form associations and not the activities of the associations themselves.<ref>"Scope of freedom of association", , Department of Justice Canada, July 31, 2023.</ref> | |||
===== ''Noble v Alley'' (1955) ===== | |||
Generally, this Charter right is used in the labour context where employees are given the right to associate with certain unions or other similar groups to represent their interests in labour disputes or negotiations. The Supreme Court also found in '']'' (2001)'','' that the right to freedom of association also includes, at least to some degree, the freedom not to associate,<ref>"Freedom from compelled association", , Department of Justice Canada, July 31, 2023</ref> but still upheld a law requiring all persons working in the province's construction industry to join a designated union.<ref> </nowiki> 3 SCR 209], at paras 19, 195, 196, 220.</ref> | |||
'']'' was a challenge to a ] for the sale of land at a cottage resort. The owner of the land had bought it with a requirement from an earlier owner that the land not be sold to Jewish or non-white people. The owner wished to sell it to an individual who was Jewish. The owner challenged the restrictive covenant, over the opposition of other residents in the cottage resort. The Supreme Court held that the covenant was not enforceable on the basis that it was too vague, and that restrictive covenants on land had to be related to land use, not the personal characteristics of the owner.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/3691/index.do|title=Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search|first=Supreme Court of|last=Canada|date=January 1, 2001|website=scc-csc.lexum.com}}</ref> | |||
=== |
==== Social equality ==== | ||
Progressive rights issues that Canada has addressed include; ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ], ] and political rights.<ref> {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081203171021/http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/pdp-hrp/canada/themes_e.cfm |date=December 3, 2008 }}</ref> | |||
===== Race ===== | |||
In 1938 there was a development in judicial protection of rights. The government of the province of ] had passed a series of laws to implement its ] platform, and had come under heavy media criticism. In response, the Legislature enacted the '']'', which would give the government the power to direct media's coverage of the government. The federal government referred several of the Alberta bills to the Supreme Court for a ]. Three of the six members of the court found that public comment on the government, and freedom of the press, are so important to a democracy that there is an ] in Canada's Constitution, to protect those values. The court suggested that only the federal Parliament could have the power to impinge on political rights protected by the implied bill of rights. The ''Accurate News and Information Act'' was therefore unconstitutional.<ref> SCR 100</nowiki>]; appeal dismissed, UKPC 46</nowiki>].</ref> The Supreme Court has not, however, used the "implied bill of rights" in very many subsequent cases. | |||
{{See also|Racism in Canada|Multiculturalism in Canada#Historical context}} | |||
] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' guarantees that "Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race."<ref name=Charter15/> | |||
Throughout Canadian history, there has been a pattern of systemic racial discrimination, particularly towards indigenous persons,<ref>Reading, Charlotte, and Sarah de Leeuw. "Aboriginal experiences with racism and its impacts." Technical Report. Prince George, British Columbia, Canada: National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health, 2014.</ref> but to other groups as well, including African,<ref name=":5">Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, ''Report of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent on its mission to Canada'', UNHRC, 36th Sess, UN DOC A/HRC/36/60/Add.1 (16 August 2017) at 2-3.</ref> Chinese,<ref>Mar, Lisa Rose. “Beyond Being Others: Chinese Canadians as National History.” ''The British Columbian Quarterly'', No. 156/7, 1 May 2008, pp. 13–34.</ref> Japanese,<ref>Sunahara, Ann Gomer. ''The Politics of Racism: the Uprooting of Japanese Canadians during the Second World War''. J. Lorimer, 1981.</ref> South Asian,<ref>Johnston, Hugh. ''The East Indians in Canada''. No. 5. Ottawa: Canadian Historical Association, 1984.</ref> Jewish,<ref>Robinson, Ira. ''A History of antisemitism in Canada''. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press, 2015.</ref> and Muslim<ref>Helly, Denise. "Islamophobia in canada? women's rights, modernity, secularism." ''Religions in the Public Sphere: Accommodating Religious Diversity in the Post-Secular Era, Recode. Responding to Complex Diversity in Europe and Canada,'' Working Paper No. 11, 2012.</ref> Canadians. These patterns of discrimination persist today. The ] Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent issued a report in 2017 finding "clear evidence that racial profiling is endemic in the strategies and practices used by law enforcement" in Canada.<ref name=":5" /> In 2018 Statistics Canada reported that members of immigrant and visible minority populations, compared with their Canadian-born and non-visible minority counterparts, were significantly more likely to report experiencing some form of discrimination on the basis of their ethnicity or culture, and race or skin colour.<ref>Simpson, Laura. "Violent victimization and discrimination among visible minority populations, Canada, 2014." ''Juristat'': ''Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics'', Statistics Canada, Apr. 12. 2018.</ref> | |||
===''Saskatchewan Bill of Rights'' (1947) === | |||
===== Sex ===== | |||
{{Main|Saskatchewan Bill of Rights}} | |||
{{Main|Feminism in Canada|Women's suffrage in Canada}} | |||
] in Toronto. Approximately 60 000 protestors attended.<ref>"10 striking signs from the Women's March in Toronto". CBC News. January 21, 2017. Retrieved January 23, 2017.</ref>]] | |||
Within the Canadian context, human rights protections for women consist of constitutional entitlements and federal and provincial statutory protections'''.''' ] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' guarantees that all "the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons".<ref>.</ref> Section 28 is not a right in of itself, as it does not state that men and women are equal; this is done by section 15. Instead, section 28 ensures that men and women have equal claim to rights listed in the Charter.<ref>Diana Majury, , ''Osgoode Hall Law Journal'', vol. 40, no. 3, 2002, 297-336, at pp. 307–308.</ref> | |||
], and remained so for the next 100 years.<ref name="Bromley2012"/> In 1969, the federal government of Prime Minister ] passed the '']'' which legalized therapeutic abortions, as long as a committee of doctors certified that continuing the pregnancy would likely endanger the woman's life or health.<ref name="Bromley2012">{{cite book|author=Victoria Bromley|title=Feminisms Matter: Debates, Theories, Activism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UfHTPNPymsMC&pg=PA26|date= 2012|publisher=University of Toronto Press|isbn=978-1-4426-0502-2|pages=26–32}}</ref> In 1988, the ] ruled in '']'' that the existing law was unconstitutional, and struck down the 1969 Act.<ref name="Jhappan2002">{{cite book|author=Radha Jhappan|title=Women's Legal Strategies in Canada|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XGMienMpAaIC&pg=PA335|year=2002|publisher=University of Toronto Press|isbn=978-0-8020-7667-0|pages=335–338}}</ref> By a 5-2 ruling, the Court found that the 1969 abortion law violated a woman's right to "security of the person" guaranteed under ].<ref name = Morgentaler1988></nowiki> 1 SCR 30.]</ref> | |||
The events leading up to World War II, and the genocidal practices of the Nazi government of Germany, had a major effect on the protection of human rights in Canada. ], at that time a ] from Saskatchewan, was in Europe in 1936 and witnessed the ] of that year, which had a significant effect on him.<ref name="Patriation"></ref> When he was elected Premier of Saskatchewan, one of his first goals was to entrench human rights in Canada's constitution. At the 1945 Dominion-Provincial Conference he proposed adding a bill of rights to the '']'', but was not able to gain support for the proposal.<ref name="Patriation" /> Instead, in 1947, the Government of Saskatchewan introduced the ], the first bill of rights in the Commonwealth since the ].<ref name="Patriation" /><ref name="SaskBill">''The Saskatchewan Bill of Rights Act, 1947'', SS 1947, c. 35.</ref><ref>Bill of Rights, 1688 (Eng), 1 Will & Mar (2d Sess), c 2.</ref> | |||
===== Disability ===== | |||
The ''Saskatchewan Bill of Rights'' provided significant protections for fundamental freedoms: | |||
{{see|Disability in Canada|Accessible Canada Act}} | |||
The rights of disabled persons in Canada are protected under the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' in section 15, which explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of mental or physical disability.<ref name=Charter15/> Canada ratified the UN '']'' in 2010.<ref>“Canada Ratifies United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.” ''Ccdonline'', Council of Canadians with Disabilities, 11 Mar. 2010, ccdonline.ca/en/international/un/canada/crpd-pressrelease-11March2010.</ref> | |||
===== LGBT ===== | |||
* right to freedom of conscience and religion (s. 3); | |||
{{Main|LGBT rights in Canada}} | |||
* right to free expression (s. 4); | |||
] | |||
* right to peaceable assembly and association (s. 5); | |||
The Supreme Court of Canada established in ''],'' that sexual orientation was "a deeply personal characteristic that is either unchangeable or changeable only at unacceptable personal costs", and therefore was one of the analogous grounds to the explicitly mentioned groups in ].<ref>Egan v. Canada, 2 S.C.R. 514 at para. 5, finding sexual orientation to be an analogous ground under the Charter but upholding the exclusion of same-sex partners from the definition of spouse in the Old Age Security Act; see also Vriend v. Alberta, 1 S.C.R. 493 (reading “sexual orientation” into the prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Individual’s Rights Protection Act).</ref> As the explicitly named grounds do not exhaust the scope of section 15, this reasoning has been extended to protect gender identity and status as a transgender person in ''CF v. Alberta (2014)''; however, it has not been formally recognized as an analogous ground.<ref>C.F. v. Alberta (Vital Statistics), ABQB 237, par. 39.</ref> | |||
* right to freedom from arbitrary imprisonment and right to immediate judicial determination of a detention (s. 6); | |||
* right to vote in provincial elections (s. 7).<ref name="SaskBill" /> | |||
==== Language ==== | |||
===''Canadian Bill of Rights'' (1960) === | |||
{{Main|Official bilingualism in Canada}} | |||
The perceived failure of Canada to establish the equality of the French and English languages was one of the main reasons for the rise of the ], during the ]. Consequently, the federal government began officially adopting multicultural and bilingual policies in the 1970s and 1980s. | |||
{{Main|Canadian Bill of Rights}} | |||
The ''Constitution Act, 1982'' established French and English as Canada's two official languages. Guarantees for the equal status of the two official languages are provided in sections 16–23 of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms''. ] guarantees that French and English “have equality of status and equal rights and privileges.” These sections of the charter provide a constitutional guarantee for the equal status of both languages in Parliament, in all federal government institutions, and federal courts.<ref name="j820">{{cite web | last=Heritage | first=Canadian | title=English and French: Towards a substantive equality of official languages in Canada | website=Canada.ca | date=February 19, 2021 | url=https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/corporate/publications/general-publications/equality-official-languages.html | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
] successfully introduced the '']'', the precursor of the '']''.]] | |||
====Multiculturalism ==== | |||
], also from Saskatchewan, was another early proponent of protecting human rights in Canada. He wrote a first draft of a bill of rights as a young lawyer in the 1920s. Elected a Member of Parliament in 1940, he regularly introduced a motion each year from 1946 onwards, calling for Parliament to enact a bill of rights at the federal level. He was concerned that there be a guarantee of equality for all Canadians, not just those who had English or French heritage. He also wanted protection for basic freedoms, such as freedom of expression.<ref name="Patriation" /> | |||
{{main|Multiculturalism in Canada}} | |||
] is reflected in the Charter through ] which states that "This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians". | |||
=== Federal legislation === | |||
In 1960, by then the Prime Minister of Canada, Diefenbaker introduced the '']''. This federal statute provide guarantees, binding on the federal government, to protect freedom of speech, freedom of religion, equality rights, the right to life, liberty and security of the person, and property rights. It also sets out significant protections for individuals charged with criminal offences.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-12.3/page-1.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, ''Canadian Bill of Rights''|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=December 31, 2002|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> | |||
==== Discrimination==== | |||
In 1977, the federal Parliament enacted the '']'' to prohibit discrimination in matters under federal jurisdiction. The act applies throughout Canada, and protects people in Canada from discrimination by the federal government, or by federally regulated enterprises, such as banks, airlines, interprovincial railways, telecommunications, and maritime shipping.<ref name =CHRA>{{Cite canlaw|short title =Canadian Human Rights Act|abbr =RSC|year =1985|chapter =C H-6|section =2.|link =https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/page-1.html#h-256795}}</ref> | |||
The act sets out a defined list of prohibited grounds of discrimination: | |||
The ''Canadian Bill of Rights'' suffered from two drawbacks. First, as a statute of the federal Parliament, it was only binding on the federal government. The federal parliament does not have the constitutional authority to enact laws which bind the provincial governments in relation to human rights. Second, and following from the statutory nature of the bill, the courts were reluctant to use the provisions of the bill as the basis for judicial review of federal statutes. Under the doctrine of ], the courts were concerned that one Parliament cannot bind future Parliaments. | |||
{{div col|colwidth=30em}} | |||
* race | |||
* national or ethnic origin | |||
* colour | |||
* religion | |||
* age | |||
* sex (including pregnancy and childbirth) | |||
* sexual orientation | |||
* gender identity or expression | |||
* marital status | |||
* family status | |||
* genetic characteristics | |||
* disability | |||
* conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.<ref></ref> | |||
{{div col end}} | |||
When the act was passed in 1977, the list of prohibted grounds of discrimination was shorter.<ref name=CHRA77>{{Cite canlaw|short title =Canadian Human Rights Act|abbr =SC|year =1977|chapter =33.|link =https://historyofrights.ca/wp-content/uploads/statutes/CN_HRA2.pdf}}</ref> Additional prohibited grounds have been added over time. | |||
====Disability discrimination==== | |||
In two significant cases, the Supreme Court rejected attempts to use the Bill of Rights to review legislation. In '']'', the court rejected a gender-based challenge to unemployment benefits which did not apply to pregnant women, while in '']'', the court rejected a challenge based on gender and indigenous status to provisions of the '']''. A notable exception was '']'', which did use the Bill of Rights to overturn a different provision of the ''Indian Act''. | |||
When the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' was passed in 1977, it had a more limited prohibition on disability discrimination than is currently the case. Section 3 of the act prohibited discrimination on the basis of "physical disability", and only in matters related to employment.<ref name=CHRA77/> In 1983, Parliament expanded this protection to be on the basis of diability generally, which includes mental disability, and removed the restriction that it only related to matters of employment.<ref name=CHRA83>''An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and to amend certain other Acts in consequence thereof'', SC 1980-81-82-83, c 143, s. 2.</ref> | |||
Several programs and services are also subject to specific legislation requiring inclusive approaches. For example, '']'' requires that polling stations be accessible (e.g., providing material in multiple formats, open and closed caption videotapes for voters who are hearing impaired, a voting template for people with visual disabilities, and many other services).<ref>{{Cite canlaw|short title =Canada Elections Act|abbr =SC |year =2000|chapter =9|section =ss 119(1)(d), 121(1), 154(1)(2), 168(6), 243(1).|link = https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-2.01/FullText.html}}</ref> | |||
=== Human Rights Acts === | |||
Other laws with disability provisions include section 6 of the ''],'' which regulates evidence-gathering involving persons with mental and physical disabilities,<ref>{{Cite canlaw|short title =Canada Evidence Act|abbr =RSC|year =1985|chapter =C-5|section =6(1),(2).|link =https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-5/page-1.html#h-137457}}</ref> and the ''Employment Equity Act'', which requires private and public sector employers under federal jurisdiction to increase representation of persons with disabilities.<ref name=EEQ/> | |||
The other provinces began to follow Saskatchewan's lead and enacted human rights laws: Ontario (1962), Nova Scotia (1963), Alberta (1966), New Brunswick (1967), Prince Edward Island (1968), Newfoundland (1969), British Columbia (1969), Manitoba (1970) and Quebec (1975). In 1977, the federal government enacted the '']''. | |||
Federal benefits include the Canada disability savings bond, and the Canada disability savings grant which are deposited into the Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP) of low-income families, as established by the Disability Savings Act.<ref> </ref> Disabled persons may also be eligible for the Disability Tax Credit, and the families of children with disabilities are eligible for the Canada Child Disability Benefit, a tax-free monthly payment.<ref> </ref> | |||
== Significant historical cases == | |||
====Sexual orientation, gender identity and expression==== | |||
In addition to these particular court cases, there were also general cases which arose in Canada, prior to the enactment of human rights legislation. | |||
Neither sexual orientation nor gender identity and expression were included in the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' when it was passed in 1977. Parliament amended the act in 1996 to include sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination.<ref></ref><ref></ref> Parliament added gender identity or expression as additional prohibited grounds of discrimination through '']'' in 2017.<ref></ref><ref></ref> | |||
In 2005, following a series of court cases across the country which held that same-sex marriage was constitutionally required, the federal Parliament passed the ''Civil Marriage Act'', which made same-sex marriage legal throughout Canada. Canada was the fourth country in the world, and the first in the Americas, to implement same-sex marriage.<ref></ref> | |||
===Komagata Maru incident=== | |||
{{Main|Komagata Maru incident}} | |||
The Komagata Maru incident occurred 1914 when a group of Indians, all ], arrived in ] with the intention of settling in Canada.<ref>{{cite book|title=The Voyage of the Komagata Maru: the Sikh challenge to Canada's colour bar|year=1989|publisher=University of British Columbia Press|location=Vancouver|isbn=0-7748-0340-1|pages=81, 83}}</ref> They were denied entry because of their race. One of the Sikh passengers, Jagat Singh Thind, was the youngest brother of ], an Indian-American Sikh writer and lecturer on "spiritual science" who was involved in an important legal battle over the rights of Indians to obtain U.S. citizenship ('']'').], east of Edmonton, Alberta. Includes a map showing the locations of the internment camps across Canada. Installed 11 August 2002.]] | |||
The Canadian federal government created the LGBTQ2 Secretariat in 2016 to support the integration of LGBTQ2 considerations into the everyday work of the Government of Canada.<ref>Privy Council Office. “About the LGBTQ2 Secretariat.” ''Canada.ca'', Government of Canada, 17 May 2018.</ref> | |||
===World War I treatment of Ukrainian Canadians=== | |||
{{Main|Ukrainian Canadian internment}} | |||
The Ukrainian Canadian internment was part of the confinement of "enemy aliens" in Canada during and for two years after the end of the ], lasting from 1914 to 1920, under the terms of the '']''. About 4,000 Ukrainian men and some women and children of ] were kept in twenty-four ] camps and related work sites – also known, at the time, as concentration camps.<ref name="27camps">{{cite web|url=http://www.infoukes.com/history/internment/gulag/|title=Internment of Ukrainians in Canada 1914-1920 |access-date=1 April 2010}}</ref> Many were released in 1916 to help with the mounting labour shortage. | |||
On November 28, 2017, ] delivered ] in the ] to individuals harmed by federal legislation, policies and practices that led to the discrimination against LGBTQ2 people in Canada.<ref>Kathleen Harris, , ''CBC News'', November 29, 2017.</ref> He introduced the ''Expungement of Historically Unjust Convictions Act,'' which passed Parliament and received ] in June 2018. The legislation gives individuals who had been convicted of offences related to consensual same-sex activity the ability to apply to the Parole Board of Canada to have the record of a conviction expunged. If the board grants the application, it has the same effect as a pardon.<ref></ref><ref>{{Cite canlaw|short title =Expungement of Historically Unjust Convictions Act|abbr =SC|year =2018|chapter =11.|link = https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/AnnualStatutes/2018_11/page-1.html#h-3}}</ref> | |||
=== Chinese head tax and Chinese Immigration Act of 1923 === | |||
{{Main|Chinese head tax in Canada}} | |||
The Chinese head tax was a fixed fee charged to each ] person entering Canada. The head tax was first levied after the ] passed the ] and was meant to discourage Chinese people from entering Canada after the completion of the ]. The tax was abolished by the ], which stopped Chinese immigration altogether, except for business people, clergy, educators, students, and other categories.<ref name="JamesMorton">James Morton. "]". Vancouver, BC: J. J. Douglas, 1974.</ref> | |||
====Sex discrimination==== | |||
===World War II treatment of Japanese Canadians=== | |||
{{Main|Japanese Canadian internment}} | |||
Japanese Canadian internment refers to confinement of ] in ] during ]. The internment began in December 1941, after the attack by carrier-borne forces of ] on ] naval and army facilities at ]. The Canadian federal government gave the internment order based on speculation of sabotage and espionage, although the RCMP and defence department lacked proof.<ref name="Maryka Omatsu 1992">Maryka Omatsu, Bittersweet Passage and the Japanese Canadian Experience (Toronto: Between the Lines, 1992), 12.</ref> Many interned children were brought up in these camps, including ], ], and ]. The Canadian government promised the Japanese Canadians that their property and finances would be returned upon release; however, these assets were sold off cheaply at auctions.<ref name="Last 3 Years 1948">"Jap Expropriation Hearing May Last 3 Years, Is Estimate," Globe and Mail (Toronto: January 12, 1948)</ref> | |||
While sex was included as a prohibited ground of discrimination when the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' was passed in 1977, in 1978 the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously held that pregnancy was not included in the similar prohibition on sexual discrimination in the ''Canadian Bill of Rights''.<ref></nowiki> 1 SCR 183.]</ref> In 1983, Parliament amended s. 3 of the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' to expressly state that discrimination on the basis of sex includes pregnancy and childbirth.<ref name=CHRA83/> | |||
]]] | |||
Beginning in the 1960s, Canada launched a series of affirmative action programs aimed at increasing representation of women in the federal public service.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Government of Canada|first=Public Services and Procurement Canada|date=2002-07-01|title=History of employment equity in the public service and the Public Service Commission of Canada / by the Equity and Diversity Directorate. : SC3-159/2011E-PDF - Government of Canada Publications - Canada.ca|url=http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/406061/publication.html|access-date=2020-11-14|website=publications.gc.ca}}</ref> Today, the '']'' requires private and public sector employers under federal jurisdiction to increase representation of women, who are one of the four designated groups protected by the act.<ref name=EEQ>{{Cite canlaw|short title =Employment Equity Act|abbr =SC|year =1995|chapter =44.|link =https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-5.401/index.html}}</ref> | |||
===Cold War forced relocation=== | |||
{{Main|High Arctic relocation}} | |||
In the early 1950s and in the context of the ], the federal government forcibly relocated 87 ] citizens to the High ] as human symbols of Canada's assertion of ownership of the region. The Inuit were told that they would be returned home to ] after a year if they wished, but this offer was later withdrawn as it would damage Canada's claims to the High Arctic; they were forced to stay.<ref>McGrath, Melanie. ''The Long Exile: A Tale of Inuit Betrayal and Survival in the High Arctic''. Alfred A. Knopf, 2006 (268 pages) Hardcover: {{ISBN|0-00-715796-7}} Paperback: {{ISBN|0-00-715797-5}}</ref> In 1993, after extensive hearings, the ] issued ''The High Arctic Relocation: A Report on the 1953–55 Relocation''.<ref>''The High Arctic Relocation: A Report on the 1953–55 Relocation'' by René Dussault and George Erasmus, produced by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, published by Canadian Government Publishing, 1994 (190 pages){{cite web|url=http://www.fedpubs.com/subject/aborig/arctic_reloc.htm |title=The High Arctic Relocation |access-date=2010-06-20 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091001232453/http://www.fedpubs.com/subject/aborig/arctic_reloc.htm |archive-date=2009-10-01 }}</ref> The government paid compensation and in 2010 issued a formal apology.<ref>{{cite web |date=15 September 2010 |title=Apology for the Inuit High Arctic relocation |url=https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100016115/1534786491628 |publisher=]}}</ref>] | |||
=== |
====Multiculturalism Act==== | ||
] is reflected at the federal level through the '']''. Enacted in 1988, the act affirms that the federal government recognizes the multicultural heritage of Canada, the rights of indigenous persons, minority cultural rights, and the right to social equality within society and under the law regardless of race, colour, ancestry, national or ethnic origin, creed or religion.<ref name="s993">{{cite web | last=Canadian Heritage | title=About the Canadian Multiculturalism Act | website=Canada.ca | date=June 3, 2024 | url=https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/about-multiculturalism-anti-racism/about-act.html | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
{{Main|Canadian residential school system}} | |||
The Indian residential schools of Canada were a network of ] schools for ] (], ], and ]) funded by the Canadian government's ], and administered by ], most notably the ] and the ].<ref name="Milloy1999">{{cite book|author=John S. Milloy|title=A National Crime: The Canadian Government and the Residential School System, 1879 to 1986|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TSGmglyxgzkC&pg=PA51|access-date=23 October 2012|date=31 May 1999|publisher=Univ. of Manitoba Press|isbn=978-0-88755-646-3|pages=51–65}}</ref> The system had origins in pre-Confederation times, but was primarily active following the passage of the '']'' in 1876, until the mid-twentieth century. The last residential school was not closed until 1997.<ref name="Milloy1999"/><ref name=":22">{{Cite web|date=June 4, 2021|title=Your questions answered about Canada's residential school system|url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-residential-schools-kamloops-faq-1.6051632|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210728101859/https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-residential-schools-kamloops-faq-1.6051632|archive-date=July 28, 2021|access-date=July 28, 2021|website=]}}</ref> | |||
=== Provincial and territorial legislation === | |||
== Contemporary human rights issues == | |||
{{main|Human Rights Act (Nunavut)|Human Rights Code (British Columbia)|Human Rights Code (Ontario)|Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms|Saskatchewan Bill of Rights}} | |||
{{Expand section|date=October 2022}} | |||
At the provincial and territorial level, human rights are protected by the Charter and by provincial human rights legislation. The Charter applies to provincial and territorial governments and agencies, and also local governments created by provincial and territorial law, such as municipalities and school boards.<ref name="g710b">{{cite web | title=Charterpedia | website=Section 32(1) – Application of the Charter | date=November 9, 1999 | url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art321.html | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> Provincial and territorial human rights laws also apply to governments, and more generally to activities under provincial or territorial jurisdiction, such as most workplaces, rental accommodation, education, and trade unions. | |||
Although there is variation among the matters covered by federal, provincial and territorial, they all generally provide anti-discrimination protections concerning employment practices, housing, and the provision of goods and services generally available to the public.<ref name=":0">Gallagher-Louisy, Cathy and Jiwon Chun. "Overview of Human Rights Codes by Province and Territory in Canada." Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion. January 2018.</ref> The laws prohibit discrimination on enumerated personal characteristics, such as race, sex, religion or sexual orientation.<ref name="w830">{{cite web | title=Canadian Human Rights Act | website=Site Web de la législation (Justice) | date=August 19, 2024 | url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/section-3.html | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
=== Clean water access in First Nation communities === | |||
{{Main|Long-term drinking water advisories}} | |||
Many First Nation communities throughout Canada experience frequent and long term drinking water advisories, the longest of which at ] having been in continual effect since 1995.<ref name=":6">{{Cite news |last1=Swampy |first1=Mario |last2=Black |first2=Kerry |date=7 May 2021 |title=Tip of the iceberg: The true state of drinking water advisories in First Nations |work=UCalgary News |url=https://ucalgary.ca/news/tip-iceberg-true-state-drinking-water-advisories-first-nations |access-date=9 April 2023}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last= |date=2023-02-01 |title=NESKANTAGA FIRST NATION MARK 28th YEAR IN BOIL WATER ADVISORY |url=http://www.matawa.on.ca/neskantaga-first-nation-mark-28th-year-in-boil-water-advisory/ |access-date=2023-04-09 |website=Matawa First Nations |language=en-CA}}</ref> Access to safe drinking water is classified as a human right by many international treaties ratified by Canada, including the ], the ], and the ].<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal |last=Klasing |first=Amanda |date=2019-10-23 |title=The Human Right to Water |url=https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/10/23/human-right-water/guide-first-nations-communities-and-advocates |journal=] |language=en}}</ref> The failure to adequately address the water advisories has led to condemnation by many human rights bodies including the ].<ref name=":7" /> In 2015 the Canadian government committed to ending all long term drinking water advisories by March 2021 and would successfully reduce the number of water advisories by 81% as of February 2023.<ref name=":6" /><ref name=":8">{{Cite web |last=Canada |first=Government of Canada; Indigenous and Northern Affairs |date=2017-09-27 |title=Ending long-term drinking water advisories |url=https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1506514143353/1533317130660 |access-date=2023-04-09 |website=Canada.ca}}</ref> While the Canadian government would fail to meet it's 2021 deadline, efforts are ongoing, however no new deadline has been set, with 32 advisories still being in effect as of February 2023.<ref name=":6" /><ref name=":8" /> | |||
All Canadian provinces and territories have legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, colour, and national or ethnic origin in employment practices, housing, the provision of goods and services, and in accommodation or facilities customarily available to the public.<ref name=":0" /> | |||
=== Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women === | |||
{{Main|Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women}} | |||
Within Canada, indigenous women and girls are disproportionately the victims of ] and ] with thousands of such cases occurring in the past 30 years.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cecco |first=Leyland |date=2022-12-02 |title='Rage, despair, disgust': Canada reels from killings of Indigenous women |language=en-GB |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/02/canada-murders-indigenous-women |access-date=2023-04-09 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> Indigenous women have been found to represent 10% of all women reported missing for longer than 30 days, and are 6 times more likely to be the victims of homicide compared to non-indigenous women.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Government of Canada |first=Department of Justice |date=2017-10-31 |title=Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls - JustFacts |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/jf-pf/2017/july04.html |access-date=2023-04-09 |website=www.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> As a result of the crisis the Canadian government conducted a ] from 2016 to 2019, with the inquiry concluding that the crisis represented a continued “race, identity and gender-based genocide.”<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.mmiwg-ffada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Final_Report_Vol_1a-1.pdf |title=Reclaiming Power and Place: the Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls |publisher=National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls |year=2019 |isbn=978-0-660-29274-8 |volume=1a |pages=5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Barrera |first=Jorge |date=31 May 2019 |title=National inquiry calls murders and disappearances of Indigenous women a 'Canadian genocide' |work=] |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/genocide-murdered-missing-indigenous-women-inquiry-report-1.5157580 |access-date=8 April 2023}}</ref> | |||
As of 2018, all Canadian provinces and territories have legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in employment practices, housing, the provision of goods and services, and in accommodation or facilities customarily available to the public.<ref name=":0" /> | |||
===Modern international view of indigenous rights=== | |||
On April 29, 2022, the ] sent a letter that criticized Canada over its ill-treatment of Indigenous people who opposed the construction of two pipelines in ].<ref name="kitchener.citynews.ca">{{cite web | url=https://kitchener.citynews.ca/national-news/un-committee-criticizes-canada-over-handling-of-indigenous-pipeline-opposition-5357794 | title=UN committee criticizes Canada over handling of Indigenous pipeline opposition }}</ref> The letter called on Canada to "immediately cease forced evictions" of indigenous protesters by police and halt construction on the two pipelines until it obtains consent from the affected indigenous communities.<ref name="kitchener.citynews.ca"/> The letter alleges that authorities intimidated and pushed indigenous people off their lands by using surveillance and force.<ref name="kitchener.citynews.ca"/> | |||
There are several provincial and territorial programs focused on income, housing, and employment supports for persons living with disabilities.<ref>Audit and Evaluation Sector Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. “Evaluation of the Income Assistance Program.” Indian and Northern Affairs., 2007, pp. 32–33. ''Government of Canada Publications'', publications.gc.ca/site/eng/479530/publication.html.</ref> | |||
== Current legal framework == | |||
In January 2018, the ] released a report comparing provincial legislation regarding human rights. Every province includes slightly different "prohibited grounds" for discrimination, covers different areas of society (e.g. employment, tenancy, etc.), and applies the law slightly differently. For example, in ], the '']'' directs the Nunavut Human Rights Tribunal to interpret the law so as not to conflict with the '']'' and to respect the principles of ], described as "Inuit beliefs, laws, principles and values along with traditional knowledge, skills and attitudes." Nunavut is unique in Canada tying its human rights code to an indigenous rather than a European-derived philosophical foundation.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://ccdi.ca/media/1414/20171102-publications-overview-of-hr-codes-by-province-final-en.pdf | title = Overview of Human Rights Codes by Province and Territory in Canada | date = January 2018 | website = Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion | access-date = September 21, 2020}}</ref> | |||
=== Domestic legal protection framework === | |||
] | |||
Human rights in Canada are now given legal protections by the dual mechanisms of constitutional entitlements and statutory human rights codes, both federal and provincial | |||
== Legal history and context == | |||
The '']'' is part of the ]. The charter guarantees political, mobility, and equality rights and fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion. It only applies to governments, and not to private individuals, businesses or other organizations. Charter rights are enforced by legal actions in the criminal and civil courts, depending on the context in which a charter claim arises. | |||
=== Colonial period === | |||
There are two main pieces of human rights legislation which apply at the federal level: the charter and the statutory '']''. The ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' protects people in Canada from discrimination when they are employed by or receive services from the federal government, or private companies that are regulated by the federal government.<ref>''Canadian Human Rights Act'', RSC 1985, c H-6.</ref> The act applies throughout Canada, but only to federally regulated enterprises. Approximately 15% of workplaces are covered by the ''Canadian Human Rights Act''. | |||
] | |||
Overall, the colonial period in Canada was characterized by the systematic denial of human rights to Indigenous peoples, women, and non-white immigrants. These groups were subject to discriminatory laws and practices that denied them basic rights and freedoms. ] until it was made illegal under the ]. The imposition of European legal systems and property rights led to the ]. ] were often denied basic rights such as the right to vote and own property, while immigrants were subjected to discrimination and exploitation in the workforce.<ref name="a425">{{cite web | title=Human Rights | website=The Canadian Encyclopedia | date=Jun 6, 1944 | url=https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/human-rights | access-date=Oct 31, 2024}}</ref> | |||
The first legal protection for human rights in Canada related to religious freedom. The ''Articles of Capitulation'' of the town of Quebec, negotiated between the French and British military commanders after the fall of Quebec in 1759, provided a guarantee of "the free exercise of the Roman religion" until the possession of Canada was determined by the British and French governments.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.42695/6?r=0&s=1|title=A collection of the acts passed in the Parliame... - Canadiana Online|website=www.canadiana.ca}}</ref> A similar guarantee was included in the ''Articles of Capitulation'' of Montreal the next year.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.42695/10?r=0&s=1|title=A collection of the acts passed in the Parliame... - Canadiana Online|website=www.canadiana.ca}}</ref> The two guarantees were formally confirmed by Britain in the '']'',<ref>.</ref> and then given statutory protection in the '']''.<ref name = QuebecAct>{{Cite web|url=https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/quebec_act_1774.asp|title=Avalon Project - Great Britain : Parliament - The Quebec Act: October 7, 1774|website=avalon.law.yale.edu}}</ref> The result was that the British subjects in Quebec had greater guarantees of religious liberty at that time than did the Roman Catholic inhabitants of Great Britain and Ireland, who would not receive similar guarantees until ] in 1829.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://members.pcug.org.au/~ppmay/acts/relief_act_1829.htm|title=THE CATHOLIC RELIEF ACT, 1829|website=members.pcug.org.au}}</ref> | |||
At the provincial level, human rights are protected by the charter and by provincial human rights legislation. The charter applies to provincial governments and agencies, and also local governments created by provincial law, such as municipalities and school boards. Provincial human rights laws also apply to governments, and also to workplaces under provincial jurisdiction. It is estimated that 85% of workplaces are covered by provincial human rights laws. | |||
Nearly a century later, the ] passed similar legislation, ending the ] of the ] in the province, and recognizing instead the principle of "legal equality among all religious denominations". The act provided that the "free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship" was protected by the Constitution and laws of the Province.<ref>''An Act to repeal so much of the Act of the Parliament of Great Britain passed in the Thirty-first year of the Reign of King George the Third, and Chaptered Thirty-one, as relates to Rectories, and the presentation of Incumbents to the same, and for other purposes connected with such Rectories'', Statutes of the Province of Canada, 14-15 Vict. (1851), c. 175, Preamble and s. 1.</ref> | |||
Although there is variation among the matters covered by federal, provincial and territorial, they all generally provide anti-discrimination protections concerning employment practices, housing, and the provision of goods and services generally available to the public.<ref name=":0">Gallagher-Louisy, Cathy and Jiwon Chun. "Overview of Human Rights Codes by Province and Territory in Canada." Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion. January 2018.</ref> The laws prohibit discrimination on enumerated personal characteristics, such as race, sex, religion or sexual orientation. | |||
=== Confederation === | |||
Claims under the human rights laws are of a civil nature. They are typically investigated by a human rights commission under the applicable human rights law and are adjudicated either by a human rights tribunal or by the court of first instance. The tribunal or court generally has broad remedial powers. | |||
==== Constitutional framework ==== | |||
In some Canadian provinces or territories the tribunal is set forth as a board or panel. Both of which have adjudicate powers. | |||
In 1867, ] was created by the '']'' (now named the ''Constitution Act, 1867'').<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-1.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=July 30, 2015|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> In keeping with British constitutional traditions, the act did not include an entrenched list of rights, other than specific rights relating to language use in legislatures and courts,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-7.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=July 30, 2015|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> and provisions protecting the right of certain religious minorities to establish their own separate and denominational schools.<ref name="s93">{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-4.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=July 30, 2015|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> Canadian law instead followed the British constitutional approach in which the (unenumerated) "]" had traditionally been defended by all the branches of the government (Parliament, the courts, and the Crown) collectively and sometimes in competition with each other. However, 20th century political and legal thought also emphasized the importance of ] and property rights as important aspects of liberty and the rule of law. This approach meant that what are now viewed as human rights concerns, based on personal circumstances, would be considered of lesser importance than contractual and property rights. | |||
== The Canadian Provincial Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals == | |||
Human rights issues in the first seventy years of Canadian history thus tended to be raised in the framework of the constitutional ] between the federal and provincial governments. A person who was affected by a provincial law could challenge that law in the courts, arguing that it intruded on a matter reserved for the federal government. Alternatively, a person who was affected by federal law could challenge it in court, arguing that it intruded on a matter reserved for the provinces. In either case, the focus was primarily on the constitutional authority of the federal and provincial governments, not on the rights of the individual. | |||
=== Alberta Human Rights Commission === | |||
The Alberta Human Rights Commission is an independent commission of the Government of Alberta. Their mandate is to foster equality and reduce discrimination. The AHRC provides public information and education programs, and helps Albertans resolve human rights complaints.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Alberta Human Rights Commission |date=June 21, 2023 |title=ABOUT THE COMMISSION |url=https://albertahumanrights.ab.ca/Pages/default.aspx }}</ref> | |||
The division of powers is also the reason that the term "civil rights" is not used in Canada in the same way as it is used in other countries, such as the United States. One of the main areas of provincial jurisdiction is "Property and civil rights",<ref name="s93"/> which is a broad phrase used to encompass all of what is normally termed the ], such as contracts, property, torts/delicts, family law, wills, estates and successions and so on. This use of the phrase dates back to the ''Quebec Act, 1774''.<ref name = QuebecAct/> Given the broad, established meaning of "civil rights" in Canadian constitutional law, it has not been used in the more specific meaning of personal equality rights. Instead, the terms "human rights" / "droits de la personne" are used. | |||
=== Alberta Human Rights Tribunal === | |||
The tribunal is the independent adjudicative arm of the Alberta Human Rights Commission. The work of the tribunal is independent from the work of the commission staff in resolving complaints. | |||
==== Early cases ==== | |||
Human rights tribunals, like other administrative tribunals, are quasi-judicial. This means they have powers and procedures similar to a court of law, but it is less formal.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Alberta Human Rights Commission |date=March 12, 2021 |title=Tribunal - Human rights tribunals are quasi-judicial |url=https://albertahumanrights.ab.ca/tribunal_process/Pages/tribunal_process.aspx }}</ref> | |||
===== ''Union Colliery Co. v. Bryden'' (1899) ===== | |||
=== British Columbia's Office of the Human Rights Commissioner === | |||
In 2018, changes to B.C.’s Human Rights Code established the Office of the Human Rights Commissioner as an independent office of the legislature and the commissioner as the first independent human rights commissioner in B.C.’s history. Under the code, the commissioner is responsible for promoting and protecting human rights in the province. The B.C.’s Human Rights Commissioner does not accept or adjudicate individual human rights complaints.<ref>{{Cite web |last=B.C.’s Office of the Human Rights Commissioner |date=July 16, 2023 |title=About Us / Vision and mandate |url=https://bchumanrights.ca/about-us/mandate/ }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=B.C.’s Human Rights Commissioner |date=July 16, 2023 |title=B.C.'s Human Rights Commissioner |url=https://bchumanrights.ca/about-us/about-the-office/ }}</ref> | |||
In '']'' a shareholder of Union Colliery Co. accused the company of violating the ''Coal Mines Regulation Act''. That law had been passed by the ] of ] and prohibited the hiring of people of Chinese origin, using an ] in the legislation.<ref>''Coal Mines Regulation Act'', RSBC 1897, c. 138, s. 4.</ref> The company successfully challenged the constitutionality of the act on the grounds that it dealt with a matter of exclusive federal jurisdiction, namely "Naturalization and Aliens".<ref></nowiki> UKPC 58], AC 580 (JCPC).</ref><ref name="s93"/> In reaching this conclusion, the ], at that time the highest court for the ], found that evidence which had been led at trial about the reliability and compentence of the Chinese employees of the colliery was irrelevant to the constitutional issue. The personal circumstances and ability of those employees did not relate to the issue of federal and provincial jurisdiction. | |||
=== British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal === | |||
The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal is an independent, quasi-judicial body created by the B.C. Human Rights Code. The tribunal is responsible for accepting, screening, mediating, and adjudicating human rights complaints. The tribunal offers the parties to a complaint the opportunity to try to resolve the complaint through mediation.<ref>{{Cite web |last=B.C. Human Rights Tribunal |date=July 16, 2023 |title=About us |url=http://www.bchrt.bc.ca/tribunal/about-us/index.htm }}</ref> | |||
=== |
===== ''Cunningham v Homma'' (1902) ===== | ||
The Manitoba Human Rights Commission is an independent agency of the Government of Manitoba and is responsible for administering the Human Rights Code. | |||
The decision in ''Union Colliery'' did not establish any general principle of equality based on race or ethnicity. In each case, the issue of race or ethnicity was simply one fact the courts took into account in determining if a matter was within federal or provincial jurisdiction. For example, just three years later, in the case of ], a provincial law prohibiting people of Chinese, Japanese or Indian descent from voting in provincial elections was held to be constitutional.<ref>''Provincial Elections Act'', RSBC 1897, c. 67, s. 8.</ref> The Judicial Committee rejected a challenge to the provincial law brought by a naturalized Japanese-Canadian, ], who had been denied the right to vote in British Columbia provincial elections. The Judicial Committee held that control of the ] in provincial elections came within the province's exclusive jurisdiction to legislate with respect to the constitution of the province. Again, the personal circumstances of the individual, in this case whether naturalised or native-born, were not relevant to the issue of the constitutional authority of the province. There was no inherent right to vote.<ref>''Cunningham v Homma'', </nowiki> UKPC 60], 9 AC 151 (JCPC).</ref> | |||
The MHRC is responsible for promoting human rights principles and educating the public about the rights and responsibilities in the code. | |||
===== ''Quong Wing v R'' (1914) ===== | |||
The MHRC is responsible for administering a discrimination complaint process by investigating and determining if there is sufficient evidence that the code has been contravened to warrant a public hearing of the complaint. | |||
] | |||
At the adjudication of a complaint, the MHRC represents the public's interest in eliminating discrimination and ensuring that employers, landlords and service providers comply with the code.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Manitoba Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Our mandate |url=http://www.manitobahumanrights.ca/about/index.html }}</ref> | |||
Similarly, in the case of '']'', the Supreme Court upheld a ] law which prohibited businesses owned by anyone of Japanese, Chinese or other East Asian background from hiring any "white woman or girl" to work in the business.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/9673/index.do|title=Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search|first=Supreme Court of|last=Canada|date=January 1, 2001|website=scc-csc.lexum.com}}</ref><ref>''An Act to prevent the Employment of Female Labour in Certain Circumstances'', Statutes of Saskatchewan 1912, c. 17, s. 1.</ref> The court, by a 4–1 majority, found that the province had jurisdiction over businesses and employment, or alternatively that the law in question was in relation to local public morality, another area of provincial jurisdiction.<ref name="s93"/> The judges in the majority acknowledged that the law had an effect on some Canadians based on their race or ethnic origins, but that was not sufficient to take the case outside of provincial jurisdiction. The dissenting judge, Justice ], was the only one who would have struck down the statute, but as in the other cases, he based his conclusion on the division of powers, not on the rights of the individual. He would have held that the provincial act limited the statutory rights granted by the federal ''Naturalization Act'', and was therefore beyond provincial jurisdiction. | |||
=== Manitoba Human Rights Adjudication Panel === | |||
The Manitoba Human Rights Adjudication Panel (or Human Rights Board of Adjudication) is an independent administrative tribunal. Adjudicators are not employed by, or otherwise involved with the commission and are appointed by the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council. | |||
===== ''Christie v York Corporation'' (1940) ===== | |||
Any party may request that a judge of the Court of Queen's Bench review of a decision made by the Human Rights Adjudication Panel.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Manitoba Human Rights Adjudication Panel |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Decision |url=http://www.manitobahumanrights.ca/decisions/index.html }}</ref> | |||
Canadian courts also upheld discrimination in public places based on freedom of contract and property rights. For example, in '']'',<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/8489/index.do|title=Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search|first=Supreme Court of|last=Canada|date=January 1, 2001|website=scc-csc.lexum.com}}</ref> the plaintiff, a black man, was denied service at a bar at the ]. He sued for damages, arguing that the tavern was under a duty to provide services to all members of the public. The case reached the Supreme Court, which held by a 4–1 majority that the owner of the business had complete freedom of commerce and could refuse service to whomever it wished, on whatever grounds it wished. The lone dissenter, ], would have held that the Quebec statute regulating liquor sales to the public required restaurants to provide their service to all customers, without discrimination. | |||
=== New Brunswick Human Rights Commission === | |||
The New Brunswick Human Rights Commission is the government agency responsible for the administration of the Human Rights Act. The mandate of the commission as described in the act is: | |||
===== ''The King v Desmond'' (1946) ===== | |||
- To forward the principle that every person is free and equal with dignity and respect; | |||
] | |||
- To promote an understanding of, acceptance of, and compliance with the Act; and | |||
], a ], went to see a movie in a theatre in ], Nova Scotia. The owner of the theatre would only allow white people to sit on the main floor. Non-whites had to sit in the gallery. Desmond, who was from out of town, did not know of the policy. She bought a ticket for the movie and went onto the main floor. When the theatre employees told her to go to the gallery, she refused. The police were called and she was forcibly removed. Desmond spent a night in jail and was fined $20, on the basis that by sitting on the main floor when her ticket was for the gallery, she had deprived the provincial government of the additional tax for the main floor ticket: one cent. She sought to challenge her treatment, by an application for ] of the tax ruling. The court dismissed the challenge on the basis that the tax statute was neutral with respect to race. The judge suggested in his decision that the outcome might have been different if she had instead appealed the conviction, on the basis that the law was being used improperly by the theatre owner to enforce a "]" type of segregation.<ref>''The King v Desmond'' (1947), 20 MPR 297 (NS SC), at 299–301.</ref> | |||
- To develop and conduct educational programs designed to eliminate discriminatory practices. | |||
In 2018, the ] announced that Viola Desmond would be the person shown on the new ten-dollar note.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.bankofcanada.ca/banknotes/vertical10/|title=Canada's Vertical $10 Note|website=www.bankofcanada.ca}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/our-family-will-go-down-in-history-desmond-s-sister-moved-by-new-10-bill-1.3833870|title='Our family will go down in history': Desmond's sister moved by new $10 bill|first=Jeff|last=Lagerquist|date=March 8, 2018|website=CTVNews}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.historicacanada.ca/content/heritage-minutes/viola-desmond|title=Viola Desmond | Historica Canada|website=www.historicacanada.ca}}</ref> | |||
- To administer the mechanism for complaint intake and resolution. | |||
===== ''Noble v Alley'' (1955) ===== | |||
Since June 2012, hearings under the Human Rights Act are conducted exclusively by the Labour and Employment Board. They are called Labour and Employment Board hearings, not Boards of Inquiry. | |||
'']'' was a challenge to a ] for the sale of land at a cottage resort. The owner of the land had bought it with a requirement from an earlier owner that the land not be sold to Jewish or non-white people. The owner wished to sell it to an individual who was Jewish. The owner challenged the restrictive covenant, over the opposition of other residents in the cottage resort. The Supreme Court held that the covenant was not enforceable on the basis that it was too vague, and that restrictive covenants on land had to be related to land use, not the personal characteristics of the owner.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/3691/index.do|title=Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search|first=Supreme Court of|last=Canada|date=January 1, 2001|website=scc-csc.lexum.com}}</ref> | |||
Like the Labour and Employment Board, Boards of Inquiry were separate and independent from the commission and their procedures and decisions could be judicially reviewed by the Court of Queen’s Bench.<ref>{{Cite web |last=New Brunswick Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=About us |url=https://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/departments/nbhrc/about-us/mandate.html }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=New Brunswick Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Boards of Inquiry |url=https://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/departments/nbhrc/boards-of-inquiry.html }}</ref> | |||
===Contemporary legislation=== | |||
=== New Brunswick Labour and Employment Board === | |||
{{external media | |||
The New Brunswick Labour and Employment Board is an independent, quasi-judicial tribunal responsible for adjudicating employment and labour matters such as the Human Rights Act upon referral by the Human Rights Commission.<ref>{{Cite web |last=New Brunswick Labour and Employment Board |date=July 16, 2023 |title=An independent forum for hearing employees and employers |url=https://www.gnb.ca/LEB-CTE/index-e.asp }}</ref> | |||
|width =180px | |||
| float =right | |||
| video1 = – Sept. 9, 1968, CBC/Radio-Canada, (2:22 mins). | |||
}} | |||
Many of the rights and freedoms that are protected under the ''Charter'', including the rights to ], ], and the ],<ref>" . ]. Retrieved March 20, 2006.</ref> have their roots in a set of Canadian laws and legal precedents<ref>Constitutional Law Group. ''Canadian Constitutional Law'' (3rd ed.). Toronto: Edmond Montgomery Publications. p. 635.</ref> sometimes known as the ]. Many of these rights were also included in the '']'', which the ] enacted in 1960. However, the ''Bill of Rights'' had a number of shortcomings. Unlike the ''Charter'', it was an ordinary ], applicable only to the federal government. | |||
=== |
==== Implied Bill of Rights (1938) ==== | ||
{{main|implied bill of rights}} | |||
The Newfoundland and Labrador Human Rights Commissioners review complaints after an investigation is complete. The commissioners decide if there is “sufficient evidence” to send a complaint to a hearing. It is a screening function only. Human rights commissioners do not make findings of discrimination or harassment. That is the job of an adjudicator at a human rights hearing.<ref name=":9">{{Cite web |last=Newfoundland and Labrador Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Our team - The Commissioners |url=https://thinkhumanrights.ca/about-the-commission/about-the-hrc-nl/ }}</ref> | |||
In 1938 there was a development in judicial protection of rights. The government of the province of ] had passed a series of laws to implement its ] platform, and had come under heavy media criticism. In response, the Legislature enacted the '']'', which would give the government the power to direct media's coverage of the government. The federal government referred several of the Alberta bills to the Supreme Court for a ]. Three of the six members of the court found that public comment on the government, and freedom of the press, are so important to a democracy that there is an ] in Canada's Constitution, to protect those values. The court suggested that only the federal Parliament could have the power to impinge on political rights protected by the implied bill of rights. The ''Accurate News and Information Act'' was therefore unconstitutional.<ref> SCR 100</nowiki>]; appeal dismissed, UKPC 46</nowiki>].</ref> The Supreme Court has not, however, used the "implied bill of rights" in very many subsequent cases. | |||
====''Saskatchewan Bill of Rights'' (1947) ==== | |||
=== Newfoundland and Labrador Human Rights Panel of Adjudicators === | |||
One member of the panel is designated as Chief Adjudicator. Adjudicators preside over human rights complaints that have been referred to a Board of Inquiry. Adjudicators decide whether or not there is a violation of the Human Rights Act and can order certain remedies. The Panel of Adjudicators is independent of the statutory office of the Human Rights Commission.<ref name=":9" /> | |||
{{Main|Saskatchewan Bill of Rights}} | |||
=== Northwest Territories Human Rights Commission === | |||
The NWT Human Rights Commission accepts complaints of discrimination and harassment based on the areas and grounds listed in the NWT Human Rights Act. The commission is responsible for the early complaint process up to the point when complaints are either dismissed or referred for hearings by the Adjudication Panel.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Northwest Territories Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Process for Resolving Complaints |url=https://nwthumanrights.ca/complaints/complaint-process/ }}</ref> | |||
The events leading up to World War II, and the genocidal practices of the Nazi government of Germany, had a major effect on the protection of human rights in Canada. ], at that time a ] from Saskatchewan, was in Europe in 1936 and witnessed the ] of that year, which had a significant effect on him.<ref name="Patriation">{{Cite web|url=https://cjhr.ca/articles/vol-4-no-2-2015/saskatchewan-the-patriation-of-the-constitution-and-the-enactment-of-the-charter-looking-back-and-looking-forward/|title=Saskatchewan, the Patriation of the Constitution and the Enactment of the Charter: Looking Back and Looking Forward – Canadian Journal of Human Rights}}</ref> When he was elected Premier of Saskatchewan, one of his first goals was to entrench human rights in Canada's constitution. At the 1945 Dominion-Provincial Conference he proposed adding a bill of rights to the '']'', but was not able to gain support for the proposal.<ref name="Patriation" /> Instead, in 1947, the Government of Saskatchewan introduced the ], the first bill of rights in the Commonwealth since the ].<ref name="Patriation" /><ref name="SaskBill">''The Saskatchewan Bill of Rights Act, 1947'', SS 1947, c. 35.</ref><ref>Bill of Rights, 1688 (Eng), 1 Will & Mar (2d Sess), c 2.</ref> | |||
=== Northwest Territories Human Rights Adjudication Panel === | |||
The Human Rights Adjudication Panel is an Independent Statutory Office, created under Part 5 of the Northwest Territories Human Rights Act. They operate independently from both private and public organizations, including the Government of the Northwest Territories, the Human Rights Commission and the Director of Human Rights.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Northwest Territories Human Rights Adjudication Panel |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Welcome |url=https://hrap-nt.ca/ }}</ref> | |||
The ''Saskatchewan Bill of Rights'' provided significant protections for fundamental freedoms: | |||
=== Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission === | |||
The Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission is an independent government agency tasked with administering the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act, a provincial statute created in 1969, with the most recent amendments in November 2012. | |||
* right to freedom of conscience and religion (s. 3); | |||
The commission is focused on two main areas; providing a human rights dispute resolution process to resolve allegations of discrimination both on an individual and systemic level; and working to eliminate barriers and prevent discrimination through education, training, public engagement and policy development. | |||
* right to free expression (s. 4); | |||
* right to peaceable assembly and association (s. 5); | |||
* right to freedom from arbitrary imprisonment and right to immediate judicial determination of a detention (s. 6); | |||
* right to vote in provincial elections (s. 7).<ref name="SaskBill" /> | |||
Provinces began to follow Saskatchewan's lead and enacted human rights laws: ], Nova Scotia (1963), Alberta (1966), New Brunswick (1967), Prince Edward Island (1968), Newfoundland (1969), ], Manitoba (1970) and ]. | |||
The commissioner responsibilities are described within the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act. They include responsibility for the strategic direction of the commission as well as for making decisions on human rights issues including referrals of complaints to Boards of Inquiry.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=About |url=https://humanrights.novascotia.ca/about }}</ref> | |||
=== |
====''Canadian Bill of Rights'' (1960) ==== | ||
The Board of Inquiry Chair (adjudicator, referred to as “Board Chair”) has the role of determining whether or not there has been a violation of the act. Once a case has been referred to a Board of Inquiry, the parties including the commission are still welcome to try and settle the dispute. Should the parties be unable to settle, this is when the Board Chair will make a determination. If the parties reach a settlement the settlement will be forwarded to the Board Chair for approval and Order.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Nova Scotia Board of Inquiry |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Commissioners |url=https://humanrights.novascotia.ca/about/commissioners }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Nova Scotia Board of Inquiry |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Boards of inquiry |url=https://humanrights.novascotia.ca/resolving-disputes/boards-inquiry }}</ref> | |||
{{Main|Canadian Bill of Rights}} | |||
=== Nunavut Human Rights Tribunal === | |||
The Nunavut Human Rights Tribunal adjudicates matters regarding discrimination or harassment in the Territory of Nunavut. Nunavut does not have a Human Rights Commission.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Nunavut Human Rights Tribunal |date=July 16, 2023 |title=How to File a Notification |url=https://nhrt.ca/how-to-file/ }}</ref> | |||
] successfully introduced the '']'', the precursor of the '']''.]] | |||
=== Ontario Human Rights Commission === | |||
The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) works to promote, protect and advance human rights through research, education, targeted legal action and policy development. | |||
], also from Saskatchewan, was another early proponent of protecting human rights in Canada. He wrote a first draft of a bill of rights as a young lawyer in the 1920s. Elected a Member of Parliament in 1940, he regularly introduced a motion each year from 1946 onwards, calling for Parliament to enact a bill of rights at the federal level. He was concerned that there be a guarantee of equality for all Canadians, not just those who had English or French heritage. He also wanted protection for basic freedoms, such as freedom of expression.<ref name="Patriation" /> | |||
The Ontario Human Rights Commission was established as an arm’s length agency of government in 1961 to prevent discrimination and to promote and advance human rights in Ontario. The OHRC is one pillar of Ontario’s human rights system, alongside the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) and the Human Rights Legal Support Centre (HRLSC).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ontario Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=About the Commission |url=https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/about-commission }}</ref> | |||
In 1960, by then the Prime Minister of Canada, Diefenbaker introduced the '']''. This federal statute provide guarantees, binding on the federal government, to protect freedom of speech, freedom of religion, equality rights, the right to life, liberty and security of the person, and property rights. It also sets out significant protections for individuals charged with criminal offences.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-12.3/page-1.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, ''Canadian Bill of Rights''|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=December 31, 2002|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> | |||
=== Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario === | |||
The HRTO resolves claims of discrimination and harassment brought under the Human Rights Code. | |||
The ''Canadian Bill of Rights'' suffered from two drawbacks. First, as a statute of the federal Parliament, it was only binding on the federal government. The federal parliament does not have the constitutional authority to enact laws which bind the provincial governments in relation to human rights. Second, and following from the statutory nature of the bill, the courts were reluctant to use the provisions of the bill as the basis for judicial review of federal statutes. Under the doctrine of ], the courts were concerned that one Parliament cannot bind future Parliaments. | |||
HRTO decisions are made by adjudicators called vice-chairs or members. HRTO adjudicators have experience, knowledge and training in human rights law and issues.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario |date=July 16, 2023 |title=What we do |url=https://tribunalsontario.ca/hrto/what-we-do/ }}</ref> | |||
In two significant cases, the Supreme Court rejected attempts to use the Bill of Rights to review legislation. In '']'', the court rejected a gender-based challenge to unemployment benefits which did not apply to pregnant women, while in '']'', the court rejected a challenge based on gender and indigenous status to provisions of the '']''. A notable exception was '']'', which did use the Bill of Rights to overturn a different provision of the ''Indian Act''. | |||
=== Prince Edward Island Human Rights Commission === | |||
The PEI Human Rights Commission staff is responsible for reviewing complaints of discrimination. When a complaint is filed, the commission helps parties attempt to resolve their dispute through mediation and settlement discussions. If not resolved at an early stage, the commission investigates to determine whether the allegation has merit.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Prince Edward Island Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Our mandate - enforcing the act |url=https://www.peihumanrights.ca/about-us/our-mandate }}</ref> | |||
=== |
==== Canadian Human Rights Acts (1977)==== | ||
{{excerpt|Canadian Human Rights Act| only=paragraph|hat=no}} | |||
The commissioners perform administrative duties, and one or more commissioners form a human rights panel to adjudicate complaints.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Prince Edward Island Human Rights Panel |date=July 16, 2023 |title=They're your Rights to know. A Guide to the PEI Human Rights Act |url=http://www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/YRTK_eng.pdf }}</ref> | |||
==== Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982)==== | |||
=== Québec: {{Lang|fr|Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse}} === | |||
{{excerpt|Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms| only=paragraph|hat=no}} | |||
The {{Lang|fr|Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse}} is the institution which promotes and upholds human rights and freedoms, the rights of youth and equal access to employment. As part of its mandate, the commission may decide, in some cases, to bring a case of discrimination, harassment or exploitation before the Human Rights Tribunal.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse |title=Origin and mission |url=https://www.cdpdj.qc.ca/en/our-services/about-us/origin-and-mission }}</ref> | |||
===International legislation and domestic influence=== | |||
=== Québec Human Rights Tribunal === | |||
Canada has ratified a multitude of ], such as those outlined in the ], ] and ].<ref name="m073">{{cite web | last=Heritage | first=Canadian | title=Human rights treaties | website=Canada.ca | date=Oct 23, 2017 | url=https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/canada-united-nations-system/treaties.html#a2a | access-date=Oct 31, 2024}}</ref> Canada, as a country, was deeply inspired by the principles laid out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after world war II.<ref name="d706">{{cite web | last=Heritage | first=Canadian | title=Commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights | website=Canada.ca | date=Dec 10, 2023 | url=https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/campaigns/declaration-human-rights.html | access-date=Oct 28, 2024}}</ref> This declaration, adopted by the ] in 1948, outlines the fundamental rights and freedoms that every individual is entitled to. In Canada, these principles have guided the development of laws and policies that protect the rights and dignity of all its citizens.<ref name="y574">{{cite web | title=Canada's approach to advancing human rights | website=GAC | date=Oct 16, 2015 | url=https://www.international.gc.ca/world-monde/issues_development-enjeux_developpement/human_rights-droits_homme/advancing_rights-promouvoir_droits.aspx?lang=eng | access-date=Oct 28, 2024}}</ref> Canadian lawyer and scholar ] played a key role in drafting the Declaration, which consists of 30 articles defining universal human rights, including equality and freedom from discrimination. These principles influenced the Canadian Human Rights Act.<ref name="g710">{{cite web | title=Human Rights in Canada | publisher =Canadian Human Rights Commission| date=Sep 10, 2024 | url=https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/en/about-human-rights/human-rights-canada | access-date=Oct 28, 2024}}</ref> | |||
The Human Rights Tribunal is an administrative court specializing in matters of discrimination, harassment, exploitation and equal access to employment programs. As such, it upholds the human rights protected by the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. | |||
The ] has noted the important role played by international human rights law in the country and the influence that treaties can have on the interpretation of domestic legislation and the charter.<ref name=":1">Eid, Elisabeth. "Interaction between international and domestic human rights law: A Canadian perspective." International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2001, pp. 2–3.</ref> International customary laws are generally considered to be automatically part of Canadian law so long as they do not conflict with existing Canadian legislation, as established in '']''<ref>R. v. Hape, 2007 SCC 26, 2 S.C.R. 292, at para 39. | |||
The Human Rights Tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear and rule on litigations regarding discrimination, harassment and exploitation in violation of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. Specializing in the adjudication of complex societal issues, the tribunal is in fact an essential instrument in the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms in Québec.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Québec Human Rights Tribunal |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Au Coeur des Droits et Libertes |url=https://tribunaldesdroitsdelapersonne.ca/en/ }}</ref> | |||
''"In my view, following the common law tradition, it appears that the doctrine of adoption operates in Canada such that prohibitive rules of customary international law should be incorporated into domestic law in the absence of conflicting legislation."''</ref> Canada follows a ] with respect to the domestic effect of international treaties. The dualist system means that in order for the treaty obligations to be given the force of law domestically, the treaty must be incorporated into domestic legislation. In Canada, international human rights treaties are, in general, not directly incorporated into domestic law but, rather, are implemented through a variety of laws, policies and programs at the federal, provincial and territorial level.<ref name=":1" /> | |||
=== Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission === | |||
The mandate of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission (SHRC) is to promote and protect the individual dignity, fundamental freedoms and equal rights of Saskatchewan citizens according to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, 2018.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=Our mission - our mandate |url=https://saskatchewanhumanrights.ca/the-commission/ }}</ref> | |||
Canada has ratified seven principal UN human rights conventions and covenants:.<ref name="m073"/> | |||
=== Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal (abolished in 2011) === | |||
Prior the enforcement of Bill 160 in 2011 the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission referred the complaints to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal for adjudication.<ref>{{Cite web |last=David Arnot, Chief Commissioner SHRC |date=2011 |title=Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission Annual Report 2010-2011 |url=https://saskatchewanhumanrights.ca/education-resources/publications/page/2/}}</ref> | |||
After the amendment of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code in 2011, “the human rights tribunal system in Saskatchewan was eliminated. As a result, the tribunal’s adjudicative role and function was shifted to the Court of Queen’s Bench.”<ref>{{Cite web |last=David Arnot, Chief Commissioner SHRC |date=2019 |title=Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission Annual Report 2018-2019 |url=https://saskatchewanhumanrights.ca/education-resources/publications/ }}</ref> | |||
This illustrates that the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission as an independent administrative body never had any adjudicative authority, neither prior nor post passing of Bill 160 respectively the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code Amendment Act, 2011, SS 2011, c 17. | |||
With the abolishment of the administrative Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal in 2011 the adjudicative function was shifted to the Court of Queens Bench. | |||
=== Yukon Human Rights Commission === | |||
The commission has a mandate to conduct research and share information about equality, harassment, discrimination, and human rights. | |||
The Yukon Human Rights Commission was created in 1987 to promote equality and diversity through research, education, and enforcement of the Yukon Human Rights Act. The commission is independent from all levels of government. Its process is governed by the act and the Yukon Human Rights Regulations.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Yukon Human Rights Commission |date=July 16, 2023 |title=About The Commission |url=https://yukonhumanrights.ca/about-the-commission/ }}</ref> | |||
=== Yukon Human Rights Panel of Adjudicators === | |||
The Yukon Human Rights Panel of Adjudicators is the tribunal which makes decisions about human rights complaints that have been referred to a hearing by the Yukon Human Rights Commission. | |||
The Yukon Human Rights Panel of Adjudicators is a tribunal which is independent of the Yukon Human Rights Commission and the Government of Yukon.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Yukon Human Rights Panel of Adjudicators |date=July 16, 2023 |title=What is the Yukon Human Rights Panel of Adjudicators? |url=https://yukonhumanrights.ca/yhrpa/ }}</ref> | |||
=== Effect of international treaties === | |||
Canada is a founding member of the ], and, in addition to the ], Canada has ratified seven principal UN human rights conventions and covenants: | |||
* ] (accession by Canada in 1970) | * ] (accession by Canada in 1970) | ||
Line 286: | Line 288: | ||
* ] (ratified by Canada in 2010) | * ] (ratified by Canada in 2010) | ||
==Human rights abuses== | |||
The ] has noted the important role played by international human rights law in the country and the influence that treaties can have on the interpretation of domestic legislation and the charter.<ref name=":1">Eid, Elisabeth. "Interaction between international and domestic human rights law: A Canadian perspective." International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2001, pp. 2–3.</ref> International customary laws are generally considered to be automatically part of Canadian law so long as they do not conflict with existing Canadian legislation, as established in '']''<ref>R. v. Hape, 2007 SCC 26, 2 S.C.R. 292, at para 39. | |||
=== Historical cases === | |||
====Indigenous peoples==== | |||
{{main|Canadian genocide of Indigenous peoples}} | |||
{{Excerpt|Canadian genocide of Indigenous peoples|only=paragraph|paragraph=1,2|hat=no}} | |||
==== Chinese immigration tax ==== | |||
''"In my view, following the common law tradition, it appears that the doctrine of adoption operates in Canada such that prohibitive rules of customary international law should be incorporated into domestic law in the absence of conflicting legislation."''</ref> Canada follows a ] with respect to the domestic effect of international treaties. The dualist system means that in order for the treaty obligations to be given the force of law domestically, the treaty must be incorporated into domestic legislation. In Canada, international human rights treaties are, in general, not directly incorporated into domestic law but, rather, are implemented through a variety of laws, policies and programs at the federal, provincial and territorial level.<ref name=":1" /> | |||
{{Main|Chinese head tax in Canada}} | |||
The Chinese head tax was a fixed fee charged to each ] person entering Canada. The head tax was first levied after the ] passed the ] and was meant to discourage Chinese people from entering Canada after the completion of the ]. The tax was abolished by the ], which stopped Chinese immigration altogether, except for business people, clergy, educators, students, and other categories.<ref name="JamesMorton">James Morton. "]". Vancouver, BC: J. J. Douglas, 1974.</ref> | |||
==== South Asian immigrants==== | |||
== Equality == | |||
{{Main|Komagata Maru incident}} | |||
{{Excerpt |Komagata Maru incident|only=paragraphs|hat=no|paragraphs=1,2}} | |||
=== |
====Internment camps ==== | ||
=====Ukrainian Canadians===== | |||
{{See also|Racism in Canada}}] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' guarantees that “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race.”<ref name=":2">''Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' s 15, Part 1 of the ''Constitution Act'', 1982, being Schedule B to the ''Canada Act 1982'' (UK), 1982, c 11.</ref> | |||
{{Main|Ukrainian Canadian internment}} | |||
] held immigrant prisoners of ], ], ] and ] descent.(1915)<ref name="CBC 2023 r788">{{cite web | title=The hidden history of Ukrainians imprisoned in Canadian labour camps in WW I | website=CBC | date=May 15, 2023 | url=https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/ukrainian-canadian-internment-camps-1.6843785 | access-date=Apr 30, 2024}}</ref>]] | |||
The Ukrainian Canadian internment was part of the confinement of "enemy aliens" in Canada during and for two years after the end of the ], lasting from 1914 to 1920, under the terms of the '']''. About 4,000 Ukrainian men and some women and children of ] were kept in twenty-four ] camps and related work sites – also known, at the time, as concentration camps.<ref name="27camps">{{cite web|url=http://www.infoukes.com/history/internment/gulag/|title=Internment of Ukrainians in Canada 1914-1920 |access-date=1 April 2010}}</ref> Many were released in 1916 to help with the mounting labour shortage. | |||
Canada has enacted comprehensive legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, colour, and national or ethnic origin in the federally regulated provision of goods and services, and employment practices in the ''Canadian Human Rights Act''.<ref name=":3">''Canadian Human Rights Act'', RSC 1985, c H-6, s 3(1).</ref> Furthermore, all Canadian provinces and territories have legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, colour, and national or ethnic origin in employment practices, housing, the provision of goods and services, and in accommodation or facilities customarily available to the public.<ref name=":0" /> Beginning in the 1970s, Canada launched a series of affirmative action programs aimed at increasing representation of racial minorities.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Government of Canada|first=Public Services and Procurement Canada|date=2002-07-01|title=History of employment equity in the public service and the Public Service Commission of Canada / by the Equity and Diversity Directorate. : SC3-159/2011E-PDF - Government of Canada Publications - Canada.ca|url=http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/406061/publication.html|access-date=2020-10-26|website=publications.gc.ca}}</ref> Today, the '']'', requires private and public sector employers under federal jurisdiction to increase representation of ] and indigenous persons.<ref name=":4">''Employment Equity Act'', SC 1995, c 44, s 2.</ref> | |||
=====Japanese Canadians===== | |||
Throughout Canadian history, there has been a pattern of systemic racial discrimination, particularly towards indigenous persons,<ref>Reading, Charlotte, and Sarah de Leeuw. "Aboriginal experiences with racism and its impacts." Technical Report. Prince George, British Columbia, Canada: National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health, 2014.</ref> but to other groups as well, including African,<ref name=":5">Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, ''Report of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent on its mission to Canada'', UNHRC, 36th Sess, UN DOC A/HRC/36/60/Add.1 (16 August 2017) at 2-3.</ref> Chinese,<ref>Mar, Lisa Rose. “Beyond Being Others: Chinese Canadians as National History.” ''The British Columbian Quarterly'', No. 156/7, 1 May 2008, pp. 13–34.</ref> Japanese,<ref>Sunahara, Ann Gomer. ''The Politics of Racism: the Uprooting of Japanese Canadians during the Second World War''. J. Lorimer, 1981.</ref> South Asian,<ref>Johnston, Hugh. ''The East Indians in Canada''. No. 5. Ottawa: Canadian Historical Association, 1984.</ref> Jewish,<ref>Robinson, Ira. ''A History of antisemitism in Canada''. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press, 2015.</ref> and Muslim<ref>Helly, Denise. "Islamophobia in canada? women's rights, modernity, secularism." ''Religions in the Public Sphere: Accommodating Religious Diversity in the Post-Secular Era, Recode. Responding to Complex Diversity in Europe and Canada,'' Working Paper No. 11, 2012.</ref> Canadians. These patterns of discrimination persist today. The ] Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent issued a report in 2017 finding "clear evidence that racial profiling is endemic in the strategies and practices used by law enforcement" in Canada.<ref name=":5" /> In 2018 Statistics Canada reported that members of immigrant and visible minority populations, compared with their Canadian-born and non-visible minority counterparts, were significantly more likely to report experiencing some form of discrimination on the basis of their ethnicity or culture, and race or skin colour.<ref>Simpson, Laura. "Violent victimization and discrimination among visible minority populations, Canada, 2014." ''Juristat'': ''Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics'', Statistics Canada, Apr. 12. 2018.</ref> | |||
{{Main|Japanese Canadian internment}} | |||
] in Toronto. Approximately 60 000 protestors attended.<ref>"10 striking signs from the Women's March in Toronto". CBC News. January 21, 2017. Retrieved January 23, 2017.</ref>]] | |||
]]] | |||
Japanese Canadian internment refers to confinement of ] in ] during ]. The internment began in December 1941, after the attack by carrier-borne forces of ] on ] naval and army facilities at ]. The Canadian federal government gave the internment order based on speculation of sabotage and espionage, although the RCMP and defence department lacked proof.<ref name="Maryka Omatsu 1992">Maryka Omatsu, Bittersweet Passage and the Japanese Canadian Experience (Toronto: Between the Lines, 1992), 12.</ref> Many interned children were brought up in these camps, including ], ], and ]. The Canadian government promised the Japanese Canadians that their property and finances would be returned upon release; however, these assets were sold off cheaply at auctions.<ref name="Last 3 Years 1948">"Jap Expropriation Hearing May Last 3 Years, Is Estimate," Globe and Mail (Toronto: January 12, 1948)</ref> | |||
=== |
=====Italian Canadians===== | ||
{{Main|Italian Canadian internment}} | |||
{{Main|Feminism in Canada|Women's suffrage in Canada}} | |||
{{Excerpt|Italian Canadian internment|hat=no}} | |||
Within the Canadian Context, human rights protections for women consist of constitutional entitlements and federal and provincial statutory protections'''.''' ] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' guarantees that all “the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.”<ref>''Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' s 28, Part 1 of the ''Constitution Act'', 1982, being Schedule B to the ''Canada Act 1982'' (UK), 1982, c 11.</ref> Section 28 is not a right in of itself, as it does not state that men and women are equal; this is done by section 15. Instead, section 28 ensures that men and women have equal claim to rights listed in the charter.<ref>Majury, Diana. "The charter, equality rights, and women: equivocation and celebration." ''Osgoode Hall Law Journal'', vol. 40, no. 3, 2002, pp. 307–308.</ref> | |||
==== International cases==== | |||
Canada has enacted comprehensive legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex in the federally regulated provision of goods and services, and employment practices in the ''Canadian Human Rights Act.''<ref name=":3" /> Furthermore, all Canadian provinces and territories have legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex in employment practices, housing, the provision of goods and services, and in accommodation or facilities customarily available to the public.<ref name=":0" /> Beginning in the 1960s, Canada launched a series of affirmative action programs aimed at increasing representation of women.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Government of Canada|first=Public Services and Procurement Canada|date=2002-07-01|title=History of employment equity in the public service and the Public Service Commission of Canada / by the Equity and Diversity Directorate. : SC3-159/2011E-PDF - Government of Canada Publications - Canada.ca|url=http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/406061/publication.html|access-date=2020-11-14|website=publications.gc.ca}}</ref> Today, the '']'', requires private and public sector employers under federal jurisdiction to increase representation of women; one of the four designated groups protected by the act.<ref name=":4" /> | |||
=====Somalia Affair===== | |||
{{main|Somalia Affair}} | |||
]s have been accused of being complicit in human rights abuses abroad,<ref name="Razack 2000 pp. 127–163">{{cite journal | last=Razack | first=Sherene | title=From the | journal=Cultural Anthropology | publisher= | volume=15 | issue=1 | year=2000 | issn=0886-7356| jstor=656642 | pages=127–163 | doi=10.1525/can.2000.15.1.127 | url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/656642 }}</ref> notably in 1993 when the ] were deployed during the ] to support ] in a peace enforcement capacity.<ref name="Thakur 1994 pp. 387–410">{{cite journal | last=Thakur | first=Ramesh | title=From Peacekeeping to Peace Enforcement: The UN Operation in Somalia | journal=The Journal of Modern African Studies | publisher=Cambridge University Press | volume=32 | issue=3 | year=1994 | issn=0022-278X| jstor=161981 | pages=387–410 | doi=10.1017/S0022278X00015159 | url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/161981 | access-date=Apr 11, 2024}}</ref><ref name="Nossal2002um">{{cite book|author=Kim Richard Nossal|title=Diplomatic Departures: Conservative Era in Canadian Foreign Policy|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Il8uF1FX7J4C&pg=PA120|year=2002|publisher=UBC Press|isbn=978-0-7748-0865-1|page=120}}</ref><ref name="auto">{{Cite news |last=Farnsworth |first=Clyde H |date=November 27, 1994 |title=Torture by Army Peacekeepers in Somalia Shocks Canada |work=] |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/27/world/torture-by-army-peacekeepers-in-somalia-shocks-canada.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110501200128/http://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/27/world/torture-by-army-peacekeepers-in-somalia-shocks-canada.html |archive-date=May 1, 2011}}</ref><ref name="Dawson 2011 p. 3">{{cite book | last=Dawson | first=G. | title="Here Is Hell": Canada's Engagement in Somalia | publisher=UBC Press | year=2011 | isbn=978-0-7748-4016-3 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eHe9h45lyQoC&pg=PA3 | page=3 | access-date=2024-03-05 | archive-date=2024-03-15 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240315030730/https://books.google.com/books?id=eHe9h45lyQoC&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false | url-status=live }}</ref> Soldiers from the ] tortured and killed a 16-year-old youth who broke into the encampment.<ref name=canencsompck/><ref name="Razack2004">{{cite book|author=Sherene Razack|title=Dark threats and white knights: the Somalia Affair, peacekeeping, and the new imperialism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Kc6K0T58yMsC&pg=PA4|year=2004|publisher=University of Toronto Press|isbn=978-0-8020-8663-1|page=4}}</ref> Known as the ], the incident has been described as "the darkest era in the ]" and led to the regiment's disbandment.<ref name="canencsompck">{{cite web|url=https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canadian-peacekeepers-in-somalia|title=Canadian Peacekeepers in Somalia|date=2 August 2019|last=Foot|first=Richard|website=www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca|publisher=Historica Canada|access-date=26 February 2024|archive-date=12 March 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240312044307/https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canadian-peacekeepers-in-somalia|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Cohen 2010 p. 160">{{cite book | last=Cohen | first=S.A. | title=Israel's Armed Forces in Comparative Perspective | publisher=Taylor & Francis | series=BESA studies in international security | year=2010 | isbn=978-1-135-16956-5 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0yiMAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA160 | access-date=2024-02-27 | page=160 | archive-date=2024-03-04 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240304062940/https://books.google.com/books?id=0yiMAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA160 | url-status=live }}</ref> | |||
=== Contemporary issues === | |||
According to the ], an annual report published by the ], which rates the gender gap between women and men in health, education, economy and politics to gauge the state of gender equality in a country, Canada ranked 16 out of 149 countries in 2018.<ref>World Economic Forum. "The Global Gender Gap Report." Geneva: World Economic Forum, 2018, pp. 10.</ref> A 2015 UN Human Rights report raised concerns about “the persisting inequalities between women and men” in Canada, including the “high level of the pay gap” and its disproportionate effect on low-income women, racialized women, and Indigenous women.<ref>“Concluding Observations on the Sixth Periodic Report of Canada.” ''CCPR/C/CAN/CO/6'', United Nations Human Rights Committee, 2015, pp. 2–3.</ref> A 2017 study by ] found that Canadian women earn $0.87 for every dollar earned by men, largely as a result of wage inequality between women and men within occupations.<ref>Moyser, Melissa. ''Women and paid work''. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Statistics Canada, 2017.</ref> | |||
==== Clean water access in First Nation communities==== | |||
=== Disability === | |||
{{Main| |
{{Main|Long-term drinking water advisories}} | ||
The rights of disabled persons in Canada are protected under the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' in section 15, which explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of mental or physical disability.<ref name=":2" /> Canada ratified the UN '']'' in 2010.<ref>“Canada Ratifies United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.” ''Ccdonline'', Council of Canadians with Disabilities, 11 Mar. 2010, ccdonline.ca/en/international/un/canada/crpd-pressrelease-11March2010.</ref> | |||
Many First Nation communities throughout Canada experience frequent and long term drinking water advisories, the longest of which at ] having been in continual effect since 1995.<ref name=":6">{{Cite news |last1=Swampy |first1=Mario |last2=Black |first2=Kerry |date=7 May 2021 |title=Tip of the iceberg: The true state of drinking water advisories in First Nations |work=UCalgary News |url=https://ucalgary.ca/news/tip-iceberg-true-state-drinking-water-advisories-first-nations |access-date=9 April 2023}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last= |date=2023-02-01 |title=NESKANTAGA FIRST NATION MARK 28th YEAR IN BOIL WATER ADVISORY |url=http://www.matawa.on.ca/neskantaga-first-nation-mark-28th-year-in-boil-water-advisory/ |access-date=2023-04-09 |website=Matawa First Nations |language=en-CA}}</ref> Access to safe drinking water is classified as a human right by many international treaties ratified by Canada, including the ], the ], and the ].<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal |last=Klasing |first=Amanda |date=2019-10-23 |title=The Human Right to Water |url=https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/10/23/human-right-water/guide-first-nations-communities-and-advocates |journal=] |language=en}}</ref> The failure to adequately address the water advisories has led to condemnation by many human rights bodies including the ].<ref name=":7" /> In 2015 the Canadian government committed to ending all long term drinking water advisories by March 2021 and would successfully reduce the number of water advisories by 81% as of February 2023.<ref name=":6" /><ref name=":8">{{Cite web |last=Canada |first=Government of Canada; Indigenous and Northern Affairs |date=2017-09-27 |title=Ending long-term drinking water advisories |url=https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1506514143353/1533317130660 |access-date=2023-04-09 |website=Canada.ca}}</ref> While the Canadian government would fail to meet its 2021 deadline, efforts are ongoing, however no new deadline has been set, with 32 advisories still being in effect as of February 2023.<ref name=":6" /><ref name=":8" /> | |||
Canada has adopted comprehensive anti-discrimination and accommodation legislation for people with disabilities. The ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' prohibits discrimination of disabled persons in the federally regulated provision of goods and services and employment practices.<ref name=":3" /> Furthermore, all Canadian provinces and territories have legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability in employment practices, housing, the provision of goods and services, and in accommodation or facilities customarily available to the public.<ref name=":0" /> | |||
==== Disabled ==== | |||
Several programs and services are also subject to specific legislation requiring inclusive approaches. For example, '']'' requires that polling stations be accessible (e.g., providing material in multiple formats, open and closed caption videotapes for voters who are hearing impaired, a voting template for people with visual disabilities, and many other services).<ref>''Canada Elections Act'', SC 2000, c 9, ss 119(1)(d), 121(1), 154(1)(2), 168(6), 243(1).</ref> Notable ad hoc legislation with disability provisions include section 6 of the ''],'' which regulates evidence-gathering involving persons with mental and physical disabilities,<ref>''Canada Evidence Act'', RSC 1985, c C-5, s 6(1)(2).</ref> and the ''Employment Equity Act'', which requires private and public sector employers under federal jurisdiction to increase representation of persons with disabilities.<ref name=":4" /> | |||
{{main|Disability in Canada}} | |||
Despite significant gains for people with disabilities in recent decades, there is historical and modern discrimination issues.<ref name="w797">{{cite web | title=Policy on ableism and discrimination based on disability | website=Ontario Human Rights Commission | date=2016-06-27 | url=https://www3.ohrc.on.ca/en/policy-ableism-and-discrimination-based-disability | access-date=2025-01-05}}</ref> People with disabilities have faced institutionalization, involuntary sterilization, employment denialism and emotional and physical violence.<ref name="c234">{{cite web | title=Conclusions Serious Problems Experienced by Diverse People with Disabilities: Western Canada | website=Ministère de la Justice | date=2021-12-02 | url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/pwdwc-phcw/conclusions.html | access-date=2025-01-05}}</ref><ref name="q056">{{cite web | title=The Daily — Experiences of violent victimization among persons with mental health-related disabilities in Canada, 2018 | website=Statistics Canada | date=2022-01-26 | url=https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220126/dq220126b-eng.htm | access-date=2025-01-05}}</ref> Those with disabilities continue to have lower educational achievement, higher unemployment rates, and are more likely to experience low income and inadequate housing compared to those without disabilities.<ref name="w797"/> Canada's provincial disability programs do not provide sufficient income to recipients to enable them to afford typical food and housing costs of $341 per month<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://cdn.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/sites/agri-food/Canada%27s%20Food%20Price%20Report%202023_Digital.pdf|title=Canada's Food Price Report 2023_Digital.pdf (dal.ca)}}</ref> and $1529/month for a studio apartment<ref>{{Cite web |title=January 2024 Rentals.ca Report |url=https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report |website=Rentals.ca}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-11-04 |title=Average rental prices in Canada surge to record highs in October 2023: report |url=https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/average-rental-prices-in-canada-surge-to-record-highs-in-october-2023-report-1.6631480 |access-date=2024-02-13 |website=CTVNews |language=en}}</ref> respectively. In Ontario and British Columbia, disability support program payments max out at $1308 and $1483.50 per month, respectively, for an individual.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Balintec |first=Vanessa |date=2023-07-23 |title=Financial support to keep people with disabilities housed falls short of what's needed: advocates |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/housing-people-disabilities-income-supports-1.6914076 |work=CBC News}}</ref> | |||
==== Missing and murdered Indigenous females==== | |||
Federal benefits include the Canada disability savings bond, and the Canada disability savings grant which are deposited into the Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP) of low-income families, as established by the Disability Savings Act.<ref>“Canada Disability Savings Grant and Canada Disability Savings Bond.” ''Canada.ca'', Canada Revenue Agency, 6 Feb. 2019, www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/registered-disability-savings-plan-rdsp/canada-disability-savings-grant-canada-disability-savings-bond.html.</ref> Disabled persons may also be eligible for the Disability Tax Credit, and the families of children with disabilities are eligible for the Canada Child Disability Benefit, a tax-free monthly payment.<ref>“Tax Credits and Deductions for Persons with Disabilities.” ''Canada.ca'', Canada Revenue Agency, 12 Feb. 2019, www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/segments/tax-credits-deductions-persons-disabilities.html.</ref> There are also several provincial and territorial programs focused on income, housing, and employment supports for persons living with disabilities.<ref>Audit and Evaluation Sector Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. “Evaluation of the Income Assistance Program.” Indian and Northern Affairs., 2007, pp. 32–33. ''Government of Canada Publications'', publications.gc.ca/site/eng/479530/publication.html.</ref> | |||
{{Main|Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women}} | |||
] | |||
Within Canada, indigenous women and girls are disproportionately the victims of ] and ] with thousands of such cases occurring in the past 30 years.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cecco |first=Leyland |date=2022-12-02 |title='Rage, despair, disgust': Canada reels from killings of Indigenous women |language=en-GB |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/02/canada-murders-indigenous-women |access-date=2023-04-09 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> Indigenous women have been found to represent 10% of all women reported missing for longer than 30 days, and are 6 times more likely to be the victims of homicide compared to non-indigenous women.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Government of Canada |first=Department of Justice |date=2017-10-31 |title=Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls - JustFacts |url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/jf-pf/2017/july04.html |access-date=2023-04-09 |website=www.justice.gc.ca}}</ref> As a result of the crisis the federal government and all ten provincial governments conducted a ] from 2016 to 2019, with the inquiry concluding that the crisis represented a continued “race, identity and gender-based genocide.”<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.mmiwg-ffada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Final_Report_Vol_1a-1.pdf |title=Reclaiming Power and Place: the Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls |publisher=National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls |year=2019 |isbn=978-0-660-29274-8 |volume=1a |pages=5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Barrera |first=Jorge |date=31 May 2019 |title=National inquiry calls murders and disappearances of Indigenous women a 'Canadian genocide' |work=] |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/genocide-murdered-missing-indigenous-women-inquiry-report-1.5157580 |access-date=8 April 2023}}</ref> | |||
==== Racial profiling and excessive force used by law enforcement==== | |||
=== LGBT === | |||
{{see|Police brutality against Indigenous Canadians|Criminal sentencing of Indigenous peoples in Canada}} | |||
{{Main|LGBT rights in Canada}} | |||
The issue of ] has been a topic of concern for many years.<ref> {{ cite web |url = http://www.archive.org/details/police-brutality-in-canada-bibliography |title = Police Brutality in Canada : A Bibliography of Books, Reports, & Magazine, Journal and Newspaper Articles |date = 1982 }}</ref> There have been numerous cases where individuals have been subjected to unnecessary and excessive force by law enforcement officers. These incidents have raised questions about the accountability and oversight of police forces in Canada.<ref name="j178">{{cite web | title=Press Release: Police-involved deaths on the rise across Canada | website=CCLA | date=February 23, 2023 | url=https://ccla.org/press-release/press-release-police-involved-deaths-on-the-rise-across-canada/ | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
The Supreme Court of Canada established in ''],'' that sexual orientation was “a deeply personal characteristic that is either unchangeable or changeable only at unacceptable personal costs,” and therefore was one of the analogous grounds to the explicitly mentioned groups in section 15 of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms''.<ref>Egan v. Canada, 2 S.C.R. 514 at para. 5. | |||
The use of excessive force by police officers disproportionately affects marginalized communities in Canada, including Indigenous peoples, racialized communities, and those experiencing mental health crises.<ref name="j079">{{cite web | last=Gurmukh | first=Sunil | title=Police violations of Charter rights highlight the need for accountability and transparency | website=The Conversation | date=September 12, 2024 | url=https://theconversation.com/police-violations-of-charter-rights-highlight-the-need-for-accountability-and-transparency-203389 | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref><ref>{{ cite web |url = https://yellowheadinstitute.org/2020/07/15/police-brutality-in-canada-a-symptom-of-structural-racism-and-colonial-violence/ |author=Krista Stelkia |title="Police Brutality in Canada: A Symptom of Structural Racism and Colonial Violence" |date=15 July 2020 }}</ref> Studies have also shown that individuals from these communities are more likely to be subjected to increased levels of incarnation.<ref name="j079"/> | |||
''Finding sexual orientation to be an analogous ground under the Charter but upholding the exclusion of same-sex partners from the definition of spouse in the Old Age Security Act; see also Vriend v. Alberta, 1 S.C.R. 493 (reading “sexual orientation” into the prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Individual’s Rights Protection Act).''</ref> As the explicitly named grounds do not exhaust the scope of section 15, this reasoning has been extended to protect gender identity and status as a transgender person in ''CF v. Alberta (2014)''; however, it has not been formally recognized as an analogous ground.<ref>C.F. v. Alberta (Vital Statistics), ABQB 237, par. 39.</ref> | |||
Canada has enacted comprehensive legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. In 1996, the ''Canadian Human Rights Act'' was amended to include sexual orientation as a protected ground,<ref>Canada, Ontario. “The context: sexual orientation, human rights protections, case law and legislation.” ''Policy on Discrimination and Harassment Because of Sexual Orientation'', Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2006, p. 6.</ref> and gender identity or expression were incorporated as additional protected grounds through '']'' in 2017. As of 2018, all Canadian provinces and territories have legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in employment practices, housing, the provision of goods and services, and in accommodation or facilities customarily available to the public.<ref name=":0" /> | |||
The Canadian federal government created the LGBTQ2 Secretariat in 2016 to support the integration of LGBTQ2 considerations into the everyday work of the Government of Canada.<ref>Privy Council Office. “About the LGBTQ2 Secretariat.” ''Canada.ca'', Government of Canada, 17 May 2018.</ref> On November 28, 2017, ] delivered ] in the House of Commons to individuals harmed by federal legislation, policies and practices that led to the discrimination of LGBTQ2 people in Canada, and introduced Bill C-66, ''the Expungement of Historically Unjust Convictions Act,''<ref>Harris, Kathleen. “'Our Collective Shame': Trudeau Delivers Historic Apology to LGBT Canadians.” ''CBC News'', Canadian Broadcasting Corporation , 29 Nov. 2017, www.cbc.ca/news/politics/homosexual-offences-exunge-records-1.4422546.</ref> which received royal assent in June 2018.<ref>Bill C-66, ''An Act to establish a procedure for expunging certain historically unjust convictions and to make related amendments to other Acts,'' 1st Sess, 42nd Leg, 2017 (assented to 21 June 2018), S.C. 2018, c. 11.</ref> The legislation was created to destroy records of consensual sexual activity between same-sex partners of legal age. | |||
=== Language and culture === | |||
{{Main|Official bilingualism in Canada|Multiculturalism in Canada}} | |||
The perceived failure of Canada to establish the equality of the French and English languages was one of the main reasons for the rise of the ], during the ]. Consequently, the federal government began officially adopting multicultural and bilingual policies in the 1970s and 1980s. | |||
The ''Constitution Act of 1982'' established French and English as Canada's two official languages. Guarantees for the equal status of the two official languages are provided in sections 16–23 of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms''. ] guarantees that French and English “have equality of status and equal rights and privileges.” These sections of the charter provide a constitutional guarantee for the equal status of both languages in Parliament, in all federal government institutions, and federal courts. | |||
] is reflected in Canadian law through the ] and ] of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states that “This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.” The ''Canadian Multiculturalism Act'' affirms that the Canadian government recognizes the multicultural heritage of Canada, the rights of indigenous persons, minority cultural rights, and the right to social equality within society and under the law regardless of race, colour, ancestry, national or ethnic origin, creed or religion. | |||
==== Bill 101 in Quebec ==== | ==== Bill 101 in Quebec ==== | ||
{{see|Children of Bill 101}} | |||
Bill 101 in Quebec is the common name for a statute passed by the National Assembly of Quebec in 1977, the ]. The law was enacted to propagate the French language and restrict the use of English. For example, the current law specifies that commercial outdoor signs can be multilingual so long as French is markedly predominant. In 1993, the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled that Quebec's sign laws broke an international covenant on civil and political rights. "A State may choose one or more official languages," the committee wrote, "but it may not exclude, outside the spheres of public life, the freedom to express oneself in a language of one's choice."{{Citation needed|date=October 2022}} | |||
The ], also known as Bill 101 in Quebec is a statute passed by the National Assembly of Quebec in 1977, the "language Charter" The law was enacted to propagate the French language and restrict the use of English. For example, the current law specifies that commercial outdoor signs can be multilingual so long as French is markedly predominant. In 1993, the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled that Quebec's sign laws broke an international covenant on civil and political rights. "A State may choose one or more official languages," the committee wrote, "but it may not exclude, outside the spheres of public life, the freedom to express oneself in a language of one's choice."<ref name="t027">{{cite web | last=Johnson | first=William | title=Opinion: Sign language makes noise at the UN | website=The Globe and Mail | date=October 3, 2003 | url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/sign-language-makes-noise-at-the-un/article772795/ | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
==== Bill 21 in Quebec ==== | |||
== Fundamental Freedoms == | |||
The ] introduced and commonly referred to as Bill 21 or Law 21, is a statute passed by the ] in 2019. Human rights issue that has been raised in relation to this law is the right to freedom of religion. The Act prohibits certain public employees, such as teachers and judges, from wearing religious symbols at work, which can limit their ability to freely practice their faith. Some argue this goes against the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the right to freedom of religion. Some also argue that the Act targets certain religious groups, particularly Muslim women who wear headscarves, by singling them out and prohibiting them from wearing their religious symbols in public positions.<ref name="l489">{{cite web | title=What's in Quebec's secularism bill: Religious symbols, uncovered faces and a charter workaround | website=CBC | date=March 28, 2019 | url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-laicity-secularism-bill-1.5075547 | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref><ref name="m909">{{cite web | title=Bill 21 | website=CCLA | date=November 21, 2023 | url=https://ccla.org/major-cases-and-reports/bill-21/ | access-date=November 1, 2024}}</ref> | |||
] guarantees four "fundamental freedoms." | |||
{{Quote box | |||
|width = 80% | |||
|align = center | |||
|quote =The "]" section of the ] states:<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-12.html|title=Consolidated federal laws of canada, THE CONSTITUTION ACTS, 1867 to 1982|first=Legislative Services|last=Branch|date=August 7, 2020|website=laws-lois.justice.gc.ca}}</ref><br /> | |||
:2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: | |||
::(a) freedom of conscience and religion; | |||
::(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; | |||
::(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and | |||
::(d) freedom of association. | |||
}} | |||
=== |
==== Refugees, asylum seekers and migrants ==== | ||
{{see|Immigration detention#Canada}} | |||
{{Main|Freedom of religion in Canada|Separate school}} | |||
A record 405,000 immigrants were admitted in 2021.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Sangani |first1=Priyanka |date=February 15, 2022 |title=Canada to take in 1.3{{nbsp}}million immigrants in 2022–24 |work=] |url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/canada-to-take-in-1-3-million-immigrants-in-2022-24/articleshow/89593324.cms?from=mdr |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220215120744/https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/canada-to-take-in-1-3-million-immigrants-in-2022-24/articleshow/89593324.cms?from=mdr |archive-date=February 15, 2022}}</ref> Canada leads the world in ]; it resettled more than 47,600 in 2022.<ref name="g225">{{cite web | last=Kim | first=Soo-Jung | title=UNHCR calls for concerted action as forced displacement hits new record in 2022 | website=UNHCR Canada | date=June 14, 2023 | url=https://www.unhcr.ca/news/unhcr-calls-for-concerted-action-as-forced-displacement-hits-new-record-in-2022/#:~:text=OTTAWA%2C%2014%20June%202023%20%E2%80%93%20Canada,UNHCR%2C%20the%20UN%20Refugee%20Agency. | access-date=July 4, 2024}}</ref> ] are meant to house individuals who are awaiting deportation or undergoing immigration proceedings, but they have become sites of mistreatment and human rights violations. Reports have surfaced detailing instances of physical abuse, lack of access to medical care, and discriminatory practices within these facilities.<ref name="e407">{{cite web | title=Canada: Abuse, Discrimination in Immigration Detention | website=Human Rights Watch | date=June 17, 2021 | url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/06/17/canada-abuse-discrimination-immigration-detention | access-date=November 2, 2024}}</ref> One of the main issues facing asylum seekers in Canada is the lack of access to legal representation and support. The lengthy processing times for asylum claims can leave individuals and families in a state of limbo, unsure of their fate and vulnerable to exploitation.<ref name="d319">{{cite web | last=Alhmidi | first=Maan | title=Asylum seekers face abuse, discrimination in Canada's immigration detention system: report | website=Global News | date=June 17, 2021 | url=https://globalnews.ca/news/7957686/immigration-asylum-seekers-discrimination-racism-detention/ | access-date=November 2, 2024}}</ref> | |||
Freedom of conscience and religion is protected by ] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms''.<ref>''Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' s 2(a), Part 1 of the ''Constitution Act'', 1982, being Schedule B to the ''Canada Act 1982'' (UK), 1982, c 11.</ref> Religious freedom is further protected by section 15 of the charter, which promotes the pursuance of equality and the freedom from discrimination under enumerated or analogous grounds; one of which is religion.<ref name=":2" /> | |||
== International indices == | |||
In a 1985 Supreme Court case, ''].,'' Chief Justice ] said that religious freedom in Canada includes freedom of religious speech, including "the right to entertain such religious beliefs as a person chooses, the right to declare religious beliefs openly and without fear of hindrance or reprisal, and the right to manifest religious belief by worship and practice or by teaching and dissemination."<ref>R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., 1 S.C.R. 295 at para. 94. | |||
{{main|International rankings of Canada}} | |||
]'' by ]]] | |||
Freedom indices produced by several non-governmental organizations publishes assessments of political rights and civil liberties for countries around the world.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://freedomhouse.org/reports/freedom-world/freedom-world-research-methodology|title=Freedom in the World Research Methodology|website=Freedom House}}</ref> | |||
According to ], an annual report by US-based think-tank ], which rates political rights and civil liberties, in 2023 Canada was ranked "Free" (the highest possible rating), with a Global Freedom Score of 97 out of 100.<ref name="d703">{{cite web | title=Canada: Freedom in the World 2024 Country Report | website=Freedom House | url=https://freedomhouse.org/country/canada/freedom-world/2024 | access-date=July 7, 2024}}</ref> | |||
''“the right to declare religious beliefs openly and without fear of hindrance or reprisal, and the right to manifest religious belief by worship and practice or by teaching and dissemination.”''</ref> | |||
According to the ], an annual index published by the U.K.-based ], that measures pluralism, civil liberties, and the state of democracy, in 2023 Canada was ranked 13th out of 167 countries and received a score of 8.69 out of 10.00.<ref name="j487">{{cite web | title=Democracy Index 2023 | website=Economist Intelligence Unit | date=February 29, 2024 | url=https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2023/ | access-date=July 7, 2024}}</ref> | |||
Concerns with regards to religious freedom remain, in respect to, discriminatory public funding of religious education in some provinces,<ref>Moon, Richard. “The Public Funding of Catholic Schools in Ontario Is Unstable and Unprincipled.” ''CBC News'', Canadian Broadcasting Corporation , 28 May 2018, www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/catholic-schools-1.4680200.</ref> public interest limitations of religious freedom,<ref>Schmitz, Cristin. “SCC Affirms 7-2 Ontario and B.C. Regulators' Denial of Accreditation to TWU's Proposed Law School.” ''The Lawyer's Daily'', LexisNexis Canada, 15 June 2018, www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/6748/scc-affirms-7-2-ontario-and-b-c-regulators-denial-of-accreditation-to-twu-s-proposed-law-school.</ref> state religious neutrality and religious dress,<ref>“Statement - Denying the Rights of One Group of People Puts Everyone's Rights at Risk.” ''Chrc-Ccdp'', Canadian Human Rights Commission, 29 Mar. 2019. | |||
According to the annual ] published by ], Canada ranked 14th out of 180 countries in 2024, up one spot from 15th in 2023 and from 19th in 2022.<ref name="z045">{{cite web | title=2024 World Press Freedom Index – journalism under political pressure | website=RSF | url=https://rsf.org/en/2024-world-press-freedom-index-journalism-under-political-pressure | access-date=July 7, 2024}}</ref> | |||
''“The Canadian Human Rights Commission is deeply concerned by Quebec’s announcement this week that it will seek to ban religious symbols for all provincial public servants in roles such as, police officers, judges, teachers and senior officials."''</ref> and conflicts between anti-discrimination law and religiously motivated discrimination.<ref>Harris, Kathleen. “Trinity Western Loses Fight for Christian Law School.” ''CBC News'', Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 16 June 2018, www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trinity-western-supreme-court-decision-1.4707240.</ref> | |||
According to the annual ], published by ], Canada was ranked 12th out of 180 countries from the top least corrupt in 2024.<ref name="e365">{{cite web | title=2023 Corruption Perceptions Index: Explore the results | website=Transparency.org | date=January 30, 2024 | url=https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023 | access-date=July 7, 2024}}</ref> | |||
Three provinces, Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, are constitutionally required to operate ]. On November 5, 1999, the ] condemned Canada and Ontario for having violated the equality provisions of the ]. The Committee restated its concerns on November 2, 2005, observing that Canada had failed to "adopt steps in order to eliminate discrimination on the basis of religion in the funding of schools in Ontario."<ref>UN Human Rights Committee, ''Report of the Human Rights Committee, Volume I: Eighty-fifth Session (17 October-3 November 2005), Eighty-sixth Session (13-31 March 2006), Eighty-seventh Session (10-28 July 2006),'' 85th Sess, UN DOC A/61/40 (1 December 2006) 20 at 24.</ref> | |||
The ] an annual index by ] and '']'' to measure the degree of ], ranks Canada 14th out of 177 in 2024, with a score of 73.7 out of 100.<ref name="n179">{{cite web | author=The Heritage Foundation | title=Index of Economic Freedom: All Country Scores | website=Index of Economic Freedom | url=https://www.heritage.org/index/pages/all-country-scores | access-date=July 7, 2024}}</ref> | |||
In 2023, the country was scored 3 out of 4 for religious freedom;<ref></ref> it was noted that in 2019, a new law was put in place stating that some government employees in positions of authority were not allowed to wear religious symbols. | |||
=== Freedom of expression === | |||
{{Main|Freedom of speech in Canada|Freedom_of_the_press#Canada|l2 = Freedom of the press in Canada}} | |||
Freedom of expression is protected by ] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' which guarantees “Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.”<ref>''Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' s 2(b), Part 1 of the ''Constitution Act'', 1982, being Schedule B to the ''Canada Act 1982'' (UK), 1982, c 11.</ref> Freedom of speech and expression has constitutional protection in Canada but is not absolute. ] of the charter allows limitations on this freedom if it can be “justified in a free and democratic society.”<ref>''Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' s 1, Part 1 of the ''Constitution Act'', 1982, being Schedule B to the ''Canada Act 1982'' (UK), 1982, c 11.</ref> The charter protection works to ensure that all such limits are reasonable and strictly necessary. The approach by the Supreme Court on free expression has been that in deciding whether a restriction on freedom of expression is justified, the harms done by the particular form of expression must be weighed against the harm that would be done by the restriction itself.<ref>Walker, Julian. “Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression: Legal Boundaries in Canada.” ''Library of Parliament Research Publicans,'' No. 2018-25-E, Library of Parliament, 2018.</ref> | |||
In Canada, legal limitations on freedom of expression include: | |||
* Sedition, fraud, specific threats of violence, and disclosure of classified information | |||
* Civil offences involving ], ], or ] | |||
* Violations of ] | |||
* Criminal offences involving ] | |||
* Municipal by-laws that regulate signage or where protests may take place | |||
Some limitations remain controversial due to concerns that they infringe on freedom of expression. | |||
=== Freedom of peaceful assembly === | |||
{{See also|Section_2_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms#Freedom_of_peaceful_assembly|label 1=Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms}}Freedom of peaceful assembly is protected by ] of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' guarantees to all Canadians freedom of peaceful assembly.<ref>''Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' s 2(c), Part 1 of the ''Constitution Act'', 1982, being Schedule B to the ''Canada Act 1982'' (UK), 1982, c 11.</ref> In 1987, the Supreme Court found in ''],'' that despite being written as a separate right, section 2(c) was closely related to freedom of expression.<ref>Reference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta.), 1 S.C.R. 313.</ref> | |||
Recent controversies involving concerns about freedom of assembly in Canada include the eviction of Occupy Canada's protests from public parks in 2011,<ref>Žbogar, Vilko., et al. “Forcible Removal of Peaceful Protests in Canada: Submission to United Nations, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression.” The Law Union of Ontario, Nov. 18. 2011.</ref> the possible effects of Bill C-51 on freedom of assembly,<ref>Theodorakidis, Alexandra. “BIll C-51, Freedom of Assembly and Canadians' Ability to Protest.” ''Canadian Journalists for Free Expression'', 25 June 2015, www.cjfe.org/bill_c_51_freedom_of_assembly_and_canadians_ability_to_protest.</ref> and ongoing CSIS surveillance of environmental and indigenous activists.<ref>“CSIS Surveillance of Pipeline Protesters Faces Federal Review.” ''CBC News'', Canadian Broadcasting Corporation , 27 Sept. 2018, www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/csis-surveillance-of-pipeline-protesters-faces-federal-review-1.3188231.</ref> | |||
=== Freedom of association === | |||
{{See also|Section_2_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms#Freedom_of_Association|label 1=Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms}}Freedom of association is protected by ]) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.''<ref>''Charter of Rights and Freedoms,'' s 2(d), Part 1 of the ''Constitution Act'', 1982, being Schedule B to the ''Canada Act 1982'' (UK), 1982, c 11.</ref> This section provides Canadians the right to establish, belong to and maintain to any sort of organization unless that organization is otherwise illegal. This right only protects the right of individuals to form associations and not the activities of the associations themselves.<ref>“Scope of freedom of association.” ''Paragraph 2(d) – Freedom of association, Charterpedia,'' Dec. 10. 2018.</ref> | |||
Generally, this charter right is used in the labour context where employees are given the right to associate with certain unions or other similar groups to represent their interests in labour disputes or negotiations. The Supreme Court also found in ''R. v. Advance Cutting & Coring Ltd. (2001),'' that the right to freedom of association also includes, at least to some degree, the freedom not to associate,<ref>“Freedom from compelled association.” ''Paragraph 2(d) – Freedom of association, Charterpedia,'' Dec. 10. 2018.</ref> but still upheld a law requiring all persons working in the province's construction industry to join a designated union.<ref>R. v. Advance Cutting & Coring Ltd., 3 S.C.R. 209, at para 19, 195, 196, 220.</ref> | |||
== Assessments == | |||
=== Comparisons of provincial and territorial legislation === | |||
In January 2018, the ] released a report comparing provincial legislation regarding human rights. Every province includes slightly different "prohibited grounds" for discrimination, covers different areas of society (e.g. employment, tenancy, etc.), and applies the law slightly differently. For example, in ], the ''Nunavut Human Rights Act'' directs the Nunavut Human Rights Tribunal to interpret the law so as not to conflict with the '']'' and to respect the principles of ], described as "Inuit beliefs, laws, principles and values along with traditional knowledge, skills and attitudes." Nunavut is unique in Canada tying its humans rights code to an indigenous rather than a European-derived philosophical foundation.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://ccdi.ca/media/1414/20171102-publications-overview-of-hr-codes-by-province-final-en.pdf | title = Overview of Human Rights Codes by Province and Territory in Canada | date = January 2018 | website = Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion | access-date = September 21, 2020}}</ref> | |||
=== International assessments === | |||
According to ], an annual report by US-based think-tank ], which rates political rights and civil liberties, in 2019 Canada was ranked "Free" (the highest possible rating), together with 86 other countries, and as the 4th freest out of 195 countries.<ref>Brandt, Christopher., et al. “Freedom in the World 2019: Democracy in Retreat.” ''Freedom House,'' 2019, pp. 16.</ref> | |||
According to the ], an annual index published by the U.K.-based ], that measures pluralism, civil liberties, and the state of democracy, in 2018 Canada was ranked 6th out of 167 countries and received a score of 9.15 out of 10.00.<ref>"Democracy Index 2018: Me too?” ''Economist Intelligence Unit,'' 2019, pp. 10.</ref> | |||
According to the annual ] published by ], Canada ranked 18th out of 180 countries in 2018, and has a declining score due to police surveillance of journalists, recent court rulings compelling journalists to hand over communications with their sources, and criminal and civil charges against some journalists for coverage of protests.<ref>“RSF Index 2018: US Falls as Canada Rises.” ''RSF'', Reporters Without Borders, 25 Apr. 2018, rsf.org/en/rsf-index-2018-us-falls-canada-rises.</ref> | |||
According to the annual ], which was published by ], Canada was ranked 9th out of 180 countries from the top least corrupt.<ref>“Corruption Perceptions Index 2018 Shows Anti-Corruption Efforts Stalled in Most Countries.” ''Www.transparency.org'', Transparency International, 29 Jan. 2019, www.transparency.org/news/pressrelease/corruption_perceptions_index_2018.</ref> | |||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
{{portal|border=no|Canada|Law}} | {{portal|border=no|Canada|Law}} | ||
*] | |||
*] | |||
* |
*] | ||
* |
*] | ||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] and the ] | |||
== |
== References == | ||
{{Reflist}} | |||
==Sources== | |||
Among the leading works on human rights in Canada, which have added great complexity to the issue by exploring twentieth-century paradigms, are Christopher MacLennan, ''Toward the Charter: Canadians and the Demand for a National Bill of Rights'' (Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2003); Ross Lambertson, ''Repression and Resistance: Canadian Human Rights Activists, 1930–1960'' (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005); and Dominique Clément, ''Canada's Rights Revolution: Social Movements and Social Change, 1937–82'' (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2008). | |||
* {{cite journal |last=Dhamoon |first=Rita Kaur |date=2016 |title=Re-presenting Genocide: The Canadian Museum of Human Rights and Settler Colonial Power |journal=The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics |volume=1 |number=1 |pages=5–30 |doi=10.1017/rep.2015.4}} | |||
* {{cite news |last=Green |first=Sarah |date=August 23, 2023 |title=The 'silent genocide' haunting Canada's liberal dream |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/women-and-girls/violence-against-indigenous-women-canada-justin-trudeau/ |work=] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240713043234/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/women-and-girls/violence-against-indigenous-women-canada-justin-trudeau/ |archive-date=July 13, 2024}} | |||
* {{cite book |last1=Lightfoot |first1=Kent G. |last2=Nelson |first2=Peter A. |last3=Grone |first3=Michael A. |last4=Apodaca |first4=Alec |date=2021 |chapter=Pathways to Persistence: Divergent Native engagements with sustained colonial permutations in North America |title=The Routledge Handbook of the Archaeology of Indigenous-Colonial Interaction in the Americas |editor1-first=Lee M. |editor1-last=Panich |editor2-first=Sara L. |editor2-last=Gonzalez |publisher=] |isbn=978-0-429-27425-1 |pages=129–146}} | |||
* {{cite journal |last1=MacDonald |first1=David B. |author-link=David Bruce MacDonald |title=Canada's history wars: indigenous genocide and public memory in the United States, Australia and Canada |journal=] |date=October 2, 2015 |volume=17 |issue=4 |pages=411–431 |doi=10.1080/14623528.2015.1096583}} | |||
* {{cite journal |last1=MacDonald |first1=David B. |author1-link=David Bruce MacDonald |last2=Hudson |first2=Graham |date=2012 |title=The Genocide Question and Indian Residential Schools in Canada |journal=] |volume=45 |number=2 |pages=427–449 |doi=10.1017/s000842391200039x}} | |||
* {{cite journal |last1=Woolford |first1=Andrew |title=Ontological Destruction: Genocide and Canadian Aboriginal Peoples |journal=] |date=2009 |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=81–97 |doi=10.3138/gsp.4.1.81}} | |||
== Further reading == | |||
On the quest for anti-discrimination legislation in Ontario, see Ruth Frager and Carmela Patrias, {{"'}}This Is Our Country, These Are Our Rights': Minorities and the Origins of Ontario's Human Rights Campaign," ''Canadian Historical Review'', vol. 82, no. 1 (March 2001), 1–35. | |||
{{refbegin}} | |||
*{{cite book | last=MacLennan | first=C. | title=Toward the Charter: Canadians and the Demand for a National Bill of Rights, 1929-1960 | publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press | year=2003 | isbn=978-0-7735-2536-8 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xxt6VAsdW5oC&pg=PP5 }} | |||
*{{cite book | last=Lambertson | first=R. | title=Repression and Resistance: Canadian Human Rights Activists, 1930-1960 | publisher=University of Toronto Press | series=Canadian Social History | year=2005 | isbn=978-0-8020-8921-2 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CKwyJaF6AMAC }} | |||
*{{cite book | last=Clément | first=D. | title=Human Rights in Canada: A History | publisher=Wilfrid Laurier University Press | series=Laurier studies in political philosophy series | year=2016 | isbn=978-1-77112-163-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=A07zsgEACAAJ }} | |||
*{{cite book | last=Clément | first=D. | title=Canada's Rights Revolution: Social Movements and Social Change, 1937-82 | publisher=UBC Press | year=2009 | isbn=978-0-7748-5843-4 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-kgS9cr2JYUC&pg=PR4 }} | |||
*{{cite book | last=Eliadis | first=F.P. | title=Speaking Out on Human Rights: Debating Canada's Human Rights System | publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press | year=2014 | isbn=978-0-7735-4305-8 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=OlAbnwEACAAJ }} | |||
*{{cite book | last=Miron | first=J. | title=A History of Human Rights in Canada: Essential Issues | publisher=Canadian Scholars' Press Incorporated | year=2009 | isbn=978-1-55130-356-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tNS092dZzzMC&pg=PP1 }} | |||
* {{cite journal|last1= Gibson|first1= Dale|date= 1966|title= Constitutional Amendment and the Implied Bill of Rights|url= http://lawjournal.mcgill.ca/userfiles/other/5006832-gibsondale.pdf|journal= ]|volume= 12|issue= 4|pages= 497–501|access-date= November 2, 2024|archive-date= October 27, 2017|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20171027025853/http://lawjournal.mcgill.ca/userfiles/other/5006832-gibsondale.pdf|url-status= dead}} | |||
* {{cite book |last= Hogg|first=Peter W. |date= 2003|title= Constitutional Law of Canada|edition=2003 Student |location= Scarborough|publisher=Thomson/Carswell|isbn= 0-45924085-4|author-link= Peter Hogg}} | |||
* {{cite thesis|last= Adams|first= Eric M.|date= 2009|title= The Idea of Constitutional Rights and the Transformation of Canadian Constitutional Law, 1930-1960|type= JD|publisher= ]|url= https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/19019/1/Adams_Eric_M_200911_SJD_thesis.pdf}} | |||
{{refend}} | |||
==External links == | |||
On the situation in Montreal and Toronto, including the Catholic aspect and Cold War discourse, see Patrick Lacroix, "Immigration, Minority Rights, and Catholic Policy-Making in Post-War Canada", ''Histoire sociale/Social History'', vol. 47, no. 93 (May 2014), 183–203. The situation in Quebec may best be explored through the events of the ]. | |||
{{commons}} | |||
* - ] | |||
For yet further information, see ] and . | |||
* - ] | |||
* - ] | |||
== References == | |||
{{Reflist}} | |||
{{North America topic|Human rights in}} | {{North America topic|Human rights in}} | ||
Line 435: | Line 411: | ||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Human Rights In Canada}} | {{DEFAULTSORT:Human Rights In Canada}} | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | ] |
Latest revision as of 17:10, 5 January 2025
Part of series on |
Canadian human rights |
---|
Source law |
Core areas |
Abuses |
Human rights in Canada have come under increasing public attention and legal protection since World War II. Inspired by Canada's involvement in the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, the current legal framework for human rights in Canada consists of constitutional entitlements, and statutory human rights codes, both federal and provincial.
The Supreme Court of Canada first recognized an implied bill of rights in 1938 in the decision Reference Re Alberta Statutes. However, prior to the advent of the Canadian Bill of Rights in 1960 and its successor the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 (part of the Constitution of Canada), the laws of Canada did not provide much in the way of civil rights and was typically of limited concern to the courts. The protections which did exist focused on specific issues, rather than taking a general approach to human rights with some provincial and federal laws offering limited safeguards.
Since the 1960s, Canada has placed emphasis on equality and inclusiveness for all people. In present-day Canada the idea of a "just society" are constitutionally protected. The "Canadian Charter" guarantees fundamental freedoms such as; free expression, religion, association and peaceful assembly rights and the right to life, liberty and security of the person. Other rights related to participation in elections, mobility, legal process, equality, language usage and minority-language education are also within the Charter.
Internationally, Canada is a signatory to multiple human rights treaties, and ranks among the highest globally in measurements of civil rights. Despite Canada being an international leader of human rights there are foreign and varied domestic concerns. There are significant issue of historic racism and discrimination against Indigenous peoples - including the modern day plight of violence faced by Indigenous females, reports of excessive force used by law enforcement and racial profiling targeting visible minority, concern with the treatment of migrants and refugees and the freedom of religion and language expression in Quebec society.
Current legal framework
Further information: Law of CanadaHuman rights in Canada are given legal protections by the dual mechanisms of constitutional entitlements and statutory human rights codes, both federal and provincial.
Claims under the Constitution and under human rights laws are generally of a civil nature. Constitutional claims are adjudicated through the court system. Human rights claims are typically investigated by a human rights commission of the appropriate jurisdiction, either the Canadian Human Rights Commission or a provincial human rights commission. If a human rights claim goes to adjudication, it may be in front of a specialised human rights tribunal, such as the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for federal claims, or a provincial human rights tribunal for claims under provincial law. In one province, Saskatchewan, there is no human rights tribunal and claims are adjudicated directly by the superior trial court of the province. A tribunal or court generally has broad remedial powers.
Constitutional provisions
Main article: Constitution of CanadaThe Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of the Constitution of Canada. The Charter guarantees political, mobility, and equality rights and fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion for private individuals and some organisations. The Charter only applies to governments, requiring them to respect the rights and freedoms it sets out. Charter rights are enforced by legal actions in the criminal and civil courts, depending on the context in which a Charter claim arises.
Fundamental freedoms
Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees four fundamental freedoms:
- freedom of conscience and religion;
- freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
- freedom of peaceful assembly;
- freedom of association.
Freedom of conscience and religion
Main articles: Freedom of religion in Canada and Separate schoolFreedom of conscience and religion is protected by section 2(a) of the Charter. Religious freedom is further protected by section 15 of the Charter, which promotes the pursuance of equality and the freedom from discrimination under enumerated or analogous grounds, one of which is religion.
In a 1985 Supreme Court case, R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., Chief Justice Brian Dickson said that religious freedom in Canada includes freedom of religious speech, including "the right to entertain such religious beliefs as a person chooses, the right to declare religious beliefs openly and without fear of hindrance or reprisal, and the right to manifest religious belief by worship and practice or by teaching and dissemination."
Concerns with regards to religious freedom remain with respect to public funding of religious education in some provinces, public interest limitations of religious freedom, state religious neutrality and religious dress, and conflicts between anti-discrimination law and religiously motivated discrimination.
Three provinces, Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, are constitutionally required to operate separate and publicly funded schools. The Supreme Court has held that the funding is not discriminatory under the Charter. On November 5, 1999, the UN Human Rights Committee held that Canada was in breach of the equality provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Committee restated its concerns on November 2, 2005, observing that Canada had failed to "adopt steps in order to eliminate discrimination on the basis of religion in the funding of schools in Ontario."
Freedom of expression
Main articles: Freedom of speech in Canada and Freedom of the press in CanadaFreedom of expression is protected by section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees "Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication." Freedom of speech and expression has constitutional protection in Canada but is not absolute. Section 1 of the charter allows limitations on this freedom if it can be "justified in a free and democratic society". The Charter protection works to ensure that all such limits are reasonable and strictly necessary. The approach by the Supreme Court on free expression has been that in deciding whether a restriction on freedom of expression is justified, the harms done by the particular form of expression must be weighed against the harm that would be done by the restriction itself.
In Canada, legal limitations on freedom of expression include:
- Sedition, fraud, specific threats of violence, and disclosure of classified information
- Civil offences involving libel, defamation, fraud, or workplace harassment
- Violations of copyright laws
- Criminal offences involving hate speech and genocide advocacy
- Municipal by-laws that regulate signage or where protests may take place
Some limitations remain controversial due to concerns that they infringe on freedom of expression.
Freedom of peaceful assembly
Freedom of peaceful assembly is protected by section 2(c) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees to all Canadians freedom of peaceful assembly. In 1987, the Supreme Court found in Reference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta), that although being written as a separate right, section 2(c) was closely related to freedom of expression.
Recent controversies involving concerns about freedom of assembly in Canada include the eviction of Occupy Canada's protests from public parks in 2011, the possible effects of Bill C-51 on freedom of assembly, and CSIS surveillance of environmental and indigenous activists.
Freedom of association
Freedom of association is protected by section 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This section provides Canadians the right to establish, belong to and maintain to any sort of organization unless that organization is otherwise illegal. This right only protects the right of individuals to form associations and not the activities of the associations themselves.
Generally, this Charter right is used in the labour context where employees are given the right to associate with certain unions or other similar groups to represent their interests in labour disputes or negotiations. The Supreme Court also found in R. v. Advance Cutting & Coring Ltd. (2001), that the right to freedom of association also includes, at least to some degree, the freedom not to associate, but still upheld a law requiring all persons working in the province's construction industry to join a designated union.
Social equality
Progressive rights issues that Canada has addressed include; discriminatory rights, assisted suicide rights, patient rights, parents' rights, children's rights, LGBTQ rights, abortion rights, minority rights, rights of the disabled, Indigenous rights, tenant rights and economic, social and political rights.
Race
See also: Racism in Canada and Multiculturalism in Canada § Historical contextSection 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that "Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race."
Throughout Canadian history, there has been a pattern of systemic racial discrimination, particularly towards indigenous persons, but to other groups as well, including African, Chinese, Japanese, South Asian, Jewish, and Muslim Canadians. These patterns of discrimination persist today. The UN Human Rights Council's Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent issued a report in 2017 finding "clear evidence that racial profiling is endemic in the strategies and practices used by law enforcement" in Canada. In 2018 Statistics Canada reported that members of immigrant and visible minority populations, compared with their Canadian-born and non-visible minority counterparts, were significantly more likely to report experiencing some form of discrimination on the basis of their ethnicity or culture, and race or skin colour.
Sex
Main articles: Feminism in Canada and Women's suffrage in CanadaWithin the Canadian context, human rights protections for women consist of constitutional entitlements and federal and provincial statutory protections. Section 28 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that all "the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons". Section 28 is not a right in of itself, as it does not state that men and women are equal; this is done by section 15. Instead, section 28 ensures that men and women have equal claim to rights listed in the Charter.
Abortion was criminalised in 1868, and remained so for the next 100 years. In 1969, the federal government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau passed the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968–69 which legalized therapeutic abortions, as long as a committee of doctors certified that continuing the pregnancy would likely endanger the woman's life or health. In 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in R. v. Morgentaler that the existing law was unconstitutional, and struck down the 1969 Act. By a 5-2 ruling, the Court found that the 1969 abortion law violated a woman's right to "security of the person" guaranteed under section 7 of the Charter.
Disability
Further information: Disability in Canada and Accessible Canada ActThe rights of disabled persons in Canada are protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in section 15, which explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of mental or physical disability. Canada ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2010.
LGBT
Main article: LGBT rights in CanadaThe Supreme Court of Canada established in Egan v. Canada (1995), that sexual orientation was "a deeply personal characteristic that is either unchangeable or changeable only at unacceptable personal costs", and therefore was one of the analogous grounds to the explicitly mentioned groups in section 15 of the Charter. As the explicitly named grounds do not exhaust the scope of section 15, this reasoning has been extended to protect gender identity and status as a transgender person in CF v. Alberta (2014); however, it has not been formally recognized as an analogous ground.
Language
Main article: Official bilingualism in CanadaThe perceived failure of Canada to establish the equality of the French and English languages was one of the main reasons for the rise of the Quebec secessionist movement, during the Quiet Revolution. Consequently, the federal government began officially adopting multicultural and bilingual policies in the 1970s and 1980s.
The Constitution Act, 1982 established French and English as Canada's two official languages. Guarantees for the equal status of the two official languages are provided in sections 16–23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 16 guarantees that French and English “have equality of status and equal rights and privileges.” These sections of the charter provide a constitutional guarantee for the equal status of both languages in Parliament, in all federal government institutions, and federal courts.
Multiculturalism
Main article: Multiculturalism in CanadaMulticulturalism is reflected in the Charter through section 27 which states that "This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians".
Federal legislation
Discrimination
In 1977, the federal Parliament enacted the Canadian Human Rights Act to prohibit discrimination in matters under federal jurisdiction. The act applies throughout Canada, and protects people in Canada from discrimination by the federal government, or by federally regulated enterprises, such as banks, airlines, interprovincial railways, telecommunications, and maritime shipping.
The act sets out a defined list of prohibited grounds of discrimination:
- race
- national or ethnic origin
- colour
- religion
- age
- sex (including pregnancy and childbirth)
- sexual orientation
- gender identity or expression
- marital status
- family status
- genetic characteristics
- disability
- conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.
When the act was passed in 1977, the list of prohibted grounds of discrimination was shorter. Additional prohibited grounds have been added over time.
Disability discrimination
When the Canadian Human Rights Act was passed in 1977, it had a more limited prohibition on disability discrimination than is currently the case. Section 3 of the act prohibited discrimination on the basis of "physical disability", and only in matters related to employment. In 1983, Parliament expanded this protection to be on the basis of diability generally, which includes mental disability, and removed the restriction that it only related to matters of employment.
Several programs and services are also subject to specific legislation requiring inclusive approaches. For example, Canada Elections Act requires that polling stations be accessible (e.g., providing material in multiple formats, open and closed caption videotapes for voters who are hearing impaired, a voting template for people with visual disabilities, and many other services).
Other laws with disability provisions include section 6 of the Canada Evidence Act, which regulates evidence-gathering involving persons with mental and physical disabilities, and the Employment Equity Act, which requires private and public sector employers under federal jurisdiction to increase representation of persons with disabilities.
Federal benefits include the Canada disability savings bond, and the Canada disability savings grant which are deposited into the Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP) of low-income families, as established by the Disability Savings Act. Disabled persons may also be eligible for the Disability Tax Credit, and the families of children with disabilities are eligible for the Canada Child Disability Benefit, a tax-free monthly payment.
Sexual orientation, gender identity and expression
Neither sexual orientation nor gender identity and expression were included in the Canadian Human Rights Act when it was passed in 1977. Parliament amended the act in 1996 to include sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Parliament added gender identity or expression as additional prohibited grounds of discrimination through An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code in 2017.
In 2005, following a series of court cases across the country which held that same-sex marriage was constitutionally required, the federal Parliament passed the Civil Marriage Act, which made same-sex marriage legal throughout Canada. Canada was the fourth country in the world, and the first in the Americas, to implement same-sex marriage.
The Canadian federal government created the LGBTQ2 Secretariat in 2016 to support the integration of LGBTQ2 considerations into the everyday work of the Government of Canada.
On November 28, 2017, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau delivered a formal apology in the House of Commons to individuals harmed by federal legislation, policies and practices that led to the discrimination against LGBTQ2 people in Canada. He introduced the Expungement of Historically Unjust Convictions Act, which passed Parliament and received royal assent in June 2018. The legislation gives individuals who had been convicted of offences related to consensual same-sex activity the ability to apply to the Parole Board of Canada to have the record of a conviction expunged. If the board grants the application, it has the same effect as a pardon.
Sex discrimination
While sex was included as a prohibited ground of discrimination when the Canadian Human Rights Act was passed in 1977, in 1978 the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously held that pregnancy was not included in the similar prohibition on sexual discrimination in the Canadian Bill of Rights. In 1983, Parliament amended s. 3 of the Canadian Human Rights Act to expressly state that discrimination on the basis of sex includes pregnancy and childbirth.
Beginning in the 1960s, Canada launched a series of affirmative action programs aimed at increasing representation of women in the federal public service. Today, the Employment Equity Act requires private and public sector employers under federal jurisdiction to increase representation of women, who are one of the four designated groups protected by the act.
Multiculturalism Act
Multiculturalism is reflected at the federal level through the Canadian Multiculturalism Act. Enacted in 1988, the act affirms that the federal government recognizes the multicultural heritage of Canada, the rights of indigenous persons, minority cultural rights, and the right to social equality within society and under the law regardless of race, colour, ancestry, national or ethnic origin, creed or religion.
Provincial and territorial legislation
Main articles: Human Rights Act (Nunavut), Human Rights Code (British Columbia), Human Rights Code (Ontario), Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, and Saskatchewan Bill of RightsAt the provincial and territorial level, human rights are protected by the Charter and by provincial human rights legislation. The Charter applies to provincial and territorial governments and agencies, and also local governments created by provincial and territorial law, such as municipalities and school boards. Provincial and territorial human rights laws also apply to governments, and more generally to activities under provincial or territorial jurisdiction, such as most workplaces, rental accommodation, education, and trade unions.
Although there is variation among the matters covered by federal, provincial and territorial, they all generally provide anti-discrimination protections concerning employment practices, housing, and the provision of goods and services generally available to the public. The laws prohibit discrimination on enumerated personal characteristics, such as race, sex, religion or sexual orientation.
All Canadian provinces and territories have legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, colour, and national or ethnic origin in employment practices, housing, the provision of goods and services, and in accommodation or facilities customarily available to the public.
As of 2018, all Canadian provinces and territories have legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in employment practices, housing, the provision of goods and services, and in accommodation or facilities customarily available to the public.
There are several provincial and territorial programs focused on income, housing, and employment supports for persons living with disabilities.
In January 2018, the Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion released a report comparing provincial legislation regarding human rights. Every province includes slightly different "prohibited grounds" for discrimination, covers different areas of society (e.g. employment, tenancy, etc.), and applies the law slightly differently. For example, in Nunavut, the Nunavut Human Rights Act directs the Nunavut Human Rights Tribunal to interpret the law so as not to conflict with the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement and to respect the principles of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, described as "Inuit beliefs, laws, principles and values along with traditional knowledge, skills and attitudes." Nunavut is unique in Canada tying its human rights code to an indigenous rather than a European-derived philosophical foundation.
Legal history and context
Colonial period
Overall, the colonial period in Canada was characterized by the systematic denial of human rights to Indigenous peoples, women, and non-white immigrants. These groups were subject to discriminatory laws and practices that denied them basic rights and freedoms. Slavery was practiced in Canada until it was made illegal under the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833. The imposition of European legal systems and property rights led to the displacement and marginalization of Indigenous peoples. Canadian women were often denied basic rights such as the right to vote and own property, while immigrants were subjected to discrimination and exploitation in the workforce.
The first legal protection for human rights in Canada related to religious freedom. The Articles of Capitulation of the town of Quebec, negotiated between the French and British military commanders after the fall of Quebec in 1759, provided a guarantee of "the free exercise of the Roman religion" until the possession of Canada was determined by the British and French governments. A similar guarantee was included in the Articles of Capitulation of Montreal the next year. The two guarantees were formally confirmed by Britain in the Treaty of Paris, 1763, and then given statutory protection in the Quebec Act, 1774. The result was that the British subjects in Quebec had greater guarantees of religious liberty at that time than did the Roman Catholic inhabitants of Great Britain and Ireland, who would not receive similar guarantees until Catholic emancipation in 1829.
Nearly a century later, the Province of Canada passed similar legislation, ending the establishment of the Church of England in the province, and recognizing instead the principle of "legal equality among all religious denominations". The act provided that the "free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship" was protected by the Constitution and laws of the Province.
Confederation
Constitutional framework
In 1867, Canada was created by the British North America Act, 1867 (now named the Constitution Act, 1867). In keeping with British constitutional traditions, the act did not include an entrenched list of rights, other than specific rights relating to language use in legislatures and courts, and provisions protecting the right of certain religious minorities to establish their own separate and denominational schools. Canadian law instead followed the British constitutional approach in which the (unenumerated) "Rights of Englishmen" had traditionally been defended by all the branches of the government (Parliament, the courts, and the Crown) collectively and sometimes in competition with each other. However, 20th century political and legal thought also emphasized the importance of freedom of contract and property rights as important aspects of liberty and the rule of law. This approach meant that what are now viewed as human rights concerns, based on personal circumstances, would be considered of lesser importance than contractual and property rights.
Human rights issues in the first seventy years of Canadian history thus tended to be raised in the framework of the constitutional division of powers between the federal and provincial governments. A person who was affected by a provincial law could challenge that law in the courts, arguing that it intruded on a matter reserved for the federal government. Alternatively, a person who was affected by federal law could challenge it in court, arguing that it intruded on a matter reserved for the provinces. In either case, the focus was primarily on the constitutional authority of the federal and provincial governments, not on the rights of the individual.
The division of powers is also the reason that the term "civil rights" is not used in Canada in the same way as it is used in other countries, such as the United States. One of the main areas of provincial jurisdiction is "Property and civil rights", which is a broad phrase used to encompass all of what is normally termed the civil law, such as contracts, property, torts/delicts, family law, wills, estates and successions and so on. This use of the phrase dates back to the Quebec Act, 1774. Given the broad, established meaning of "civil rights" in Canadian constitutional law, it has not been used in the more specific meaning of personal equality rights. Instead, the terms "human rights" / "droits de la personne" are used.
Early cases
Union Colliery Co. v. Bryden (1899)
In Union Colliery Co of British Columbia v Bryden a shareholder of Union Colliery Co. accused the company of violating the Coal Mines Regulation Act. That law had been passed by the provincial Legislature of British Columbia and prohibited the hiring of people of Chinese origin, using an ethnic slur in the legislation. The company successfully challenged the constitutionality of the act on the grounds that it dealt with a matter of exclusive federal jurisdiction, namely "Naturalization and Aliens". In reaching this conclusion, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, at that time the highest court for the British Empire, found that evidence which had been led at trial about the reliability and compentence of the Chinese employees of the colliery was irrelevant to the constitutional issue. The personal circumstances and ability of those employees did not relate to the issue of federal and provincial jurisdiction.
Cunningham v Homma (1902)
The decision in Union Colliery did not establish any general principle of equality based on race or ethnicity. In each case, the issue of race or ethnicity was simply one fact the courts took into account in determining if a matter was within federal or provincial jurisdiction. For example, just three years later, in the case of Cunningham v Homma, a provincial law prohibiting people of Chinese, Japanese or Indian descent from voting in provincial elections was held to be constitutional. The Judicial Committee rejected a challenge to the provincial law brought by a naturalized Japanese-Canadian, Tomekichi Homma, who had been denied the right to vote in British Columbia provincial elections. The Judicial Committee held that control of the franchise in provincial elections came within the province's exclusive jurisdiction to legislate with respect to the constitution of the province. Again, the personal circumstances of the individual, in this case whether naturalised or native-born, were not relevant to the issue of the constitutional authority of the province. There was no inherent right to vote.
Quong Wing v R (1914)
Similarly, in the case of Quong Wing v R, the Supreme Court upheld a Saskatchewan law which prohibited businesses owned by anyone of Japanese, Chinese or other East Asian background from hiring any "white woman or girl" to work in the business. The court, by a 4–1 majority, found that the province had jurisdiction over businesses and employment, or alternatively that the law in question was in relation to local public morality, another area of provincial jurisdiction. The judges in the majority acknowledged that the law had an effect on some Canadians based on their race or ethnic origins, but that was not sufficient to take the case outside of provincial jurisdiction. The dissenting judge, Justice John Idington, was the only one who would have struck down the statute, but as in the other cases, he based his conclusion on the division of powers, not on the rights of the individual. He would have held that the provincial act limited the statutory rights granted by the federal Naturalization Act, and was therefore beyond provincial jurisdiction.
Christie v York Corporation (1940)
Canadian courts also upheld discrimination in public places based on freedom of contract and property rights. For example, in Christie v York Corporation, the plaintiff, a black man, was denied service at a bar at the Montreal Forum. He sued for damages, arguing that the tavern was under a duty to provide services to all members of the public. The case reached the Supreme Court, which held by a 4–1 majority that the owner of the business had complete freedom of commerce and could refuse service to whomever it wished, on whatever grounds it wished. The lone dissenter, Justice Davis, would have held that the Quebec statute regulating liquor sales to the public required restaurants to provide their service to all customers, without discrimination.
The King v Desmond (1946)
Viola Desmond, a black Nova Scotian, went to see a movie in a theatre in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia. The owner of the theatre would only allow white people to sit on the main floor. Non-whites had to sit in the gallery. Desmond, who was from out of town, did not know of the policy. She bought a ticket for the movie and went onto the main floor. When the theatre employees told her to go to the gallery, she refused. The police were called and she was forcibly removed. Desmond spent a night in jail and was fined $20, on the basis that by sitting on the main floor when her ticket was for the gallery, she had deprived the provincial government of the additional tax for the main floor ticket: one cent. She sought to challenge her treatment, by an application for judicial review of the tax ruling. The court dismissed the challenge on the basis that the tax statute was neutral with respect to race. The judge suggested in his decision that the outcome might have been different if she had instead appealed the conviction, on the basis that the law was being used improperly by the theatre owner to enforce a "Jim Crow" type of segregation.
In 2018, the Bank of Canada announced that Viola Desmond would be the person shown on the new ten-dollar note.
Noble v Alley (1955)
Noble v. Alley was a challenge to a restrictive covenant for the sale of land at a cottage resort. The owner of the land had bought it with a requirement from an earlier owner that the land not be sold to Jewish or non-white people. The owner wished to sell it to an individual who was Jewish. The owner challenged the restrictive covenant, over the opposition of other residents in the cottage resort. The Supreme Court held that the covenant was not enforceable on the basis that it was too vague, and that restrictive covenants on land had to be related to land use, not the personal characteristics of the owner.
Contemporary legislation
External videos | |
---|---|
– Pierre Trudeau declares 'Canada must be a just society' in 1968 – Sept. 9, 1968, CBC/Radio-Canada, (2:22 mins). |
Many of the rights and freedoms that are protected under the Charter, including the rights to freedom of speech, habeas corpus, and the presumption of innocence, have their roots in a set of Canadian laws and legal precedents sometimes known as the Implied Bill of Rights. Many of these rights were also included in the Canadian Bill of Rights, which the Canadian Parliament enacted in 1960. However, the Bill of Rights had a number of shortcomings. Unlike the Charter, it was an ordinary Act of Parliament, applicable only to the federal government.
Implied Bill of Rights (1938)
Main article: implied bill of rightsIn 1938 there was a development in judicial protection of rights. The government of the province of Alberta had passed a series of laws to implement its social credit platform, and had come under heavy media criticism. In response, the Legislature enacted the Accurate News and Information Act, which would give the government the power to direct media's coverage of the government. The federal government referred several of the Alberta bills to the Supreme Court for a reference opinion. Three of the six members of the court found that public comment on the government, and freedom of the press, are so important to a democracy that there is an implied bill of rights in Canada's Constitution, to protect those values. The court suggested that only the federal Parliament could have the power to impinge on political rights protected by the implied bill of rights. The Accurate News and Information Act was therefore unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has not, however, used the "implied bill of rights" in very many subsequent cases.
Saskatchewan Bill of Rights (1947)
Main article: Saskatchewan Bill of RightsThe events leading up to World War II, and the genocidal practices of the Nazi government of Germany, had a major effect on the protection of human rights in Canada. Tommy Douglas, at that time a Member of Parliament from Saskatchewan, was in Europe in 1936 and witnessed the Nuremberg Rally of that year, which had a significant effect on him. When he was elected Premier of Saskatchewan, one of his first goals was to entrench human rights in Canada's constitution. At the 1945 Dominion-Provincial Conference he proposed adding a bill of rights to the British North America Act, 1867, but was not able to gain support for the proposal. Instead, in 1947, the Government of Saskatchewan introduced the Saskatchewan Bill of Rights, the first bill of rights in the Commonwealth since the English Bill of Rights of 1689.
The Saskatchewan Bill of Rights provided significant protections for fundamental freedoms:
- right to freedom of conscience and religion (s. 3);
- right to free expression (s. 4);
- right to peaceable assembly and association (s. 5);
- right to freedom from arbitrary imprisonment and right to immediate judicial determination of a detention (s. 6);
- right to vote in provincial elections (s. 7).
Provinces began to follow Saskatchewan's lead and enacted human rights laws: Ontario (1962), Nova Scotia (1963), Alberta (1966), New Brunswick (1967), Prince Edward Island (1968), Newfoundland (1969), British Columbia (1969), Manitoba (1970) and Quebec (1975).
Canadian Bill of Rights (1960)
Main article: Canadian Bill of RightsJohn Diefenbaker, also from Saskatchewan, was another early proponent of protecting human rights in Canada. He wrote a first draft of a bill of rights as a young lawyer in the 1920s. Elected a Member of Parliament in 1940, he regularly introduced a motion each year from 1946 onwards, calling for Parliament to enact a bill of rights at the federal level. He was concerned that there be a guarantee of equality for all Canadians, not just those who had English or French heritage. He also wanted protection for basic freedoms, such as freedom of expression.
In 1960, by then the Prime Minister of Canada, Diefenbaker introduced the Canadian Bill of Rights. This federal statute provide guarantees, binding on the federal government, to protect freedom of speech, freedom of religion, equality rights, the right to life, liberty and security of the person, and property rights. It also sets out significant protections for individuals charged with criminal offences.
The Canadian Bill of Rights suffered from two drawbacks. First, as a statute of the federal Parliament, it was only binding on the federal government. The federal parliament does not have the constitutional authority to enact laws which bind the provincial governments in relation to human rights. Second, and following from the statutory nature of the bill, the courts were reluctant to use the provisions of the bill as the basis for judicial review of federal statutes. Under the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy, the courts were concerned that one Parliament cannot bind future Parliaments.
In two significant cases, the Supreme Court rejected attempts to use the Bill of Rights to review legislation. In Bliss v. Canada, the court rejected a gender-based challenge to unemployment benefits which did not apply to pregnant women, while in Attorney General of Canada v. Lavell, the court rejected a challenge based on gender and indigenous status to provisions of the Indian Act. A notable exception was R. v. Drybones, which did use the Bill of Rights to overturn a different provision of the Indian Act.
Canadian Human Rights Acts (1977)
The Canadian Human Rights Act (French: Loi canadienne sur les droits de la personne) is a statute passed by the Parliament of Canada in 1977 with the express goal of extending the law to ensure equal opportunity to individuals who may be victims of discriminatory practices based on a set of prohibited grounds. The prohibited grounds currently are: race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability, and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered. Before the act was enacted, at least two provinces had enacted their own anti-discrimination laws. Ontario passed its Racial Discrimination Act in 1944, and Saskatchewan passed its Bill of Rights in 1947.Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982)
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (French: Charte canadienne des droits et libertés), often simply referred to as the Charter in Canada, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and guarantees the civil rights of everyone in Canada. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was proclaimed in force by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, as part of the Constitution Act, 1982.International legislation and domestic influence
Canada has ratified a multitude of international humanitarian declarations and conventions, such as those outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Geneva Conventions and Rome Statute. Canada, as a country, was deeply inspired by the principles laid out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after world war II. This declaration, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, outlines the fundamental rights and freedoms that every individual is entitled to. In Canada, these principles have guided the development of laws and policies that protect the rights and dignity of all its citizens. Canadian lawyer and scholar John Humphrey played a key role in drafting the Declaration, which consists of 30 articles defining universal human rights, including equality and freedom from discrimination. These principles influenced the Canadian Human Rights Act.
The Supreme Court of Canada has noted the important role played by international human rights law in the country and the influence that treaties can have on the interpretation of domestic legislation and the charter. International customary laws are generally considered to be automatically part of Canadian law so long as they do not conflict with existing Canadian legislation, as established in R v Hape (2007). Canada follows a dualist approach with respect to the domestic effect of international treaties. The dualist system means that in order for the treaty obligations to be given the force of law domestically, the treaty must be incorporated into domestic legislation. In Canada, international human rights treaties are, in general, not directly incorporated into domestic law but, rather, are implemented through a variety of laws, policies and programs at the federal, provincial and territorial level.
Canada has ratified seven principal UN human rights conventions and covenants:.
- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (accession by Canada in 1970)
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (accession by Canada in 1976)
- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ratified by Canada in 1976)
- Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (ratified by Canada in 1981)
- Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (ratified by Canada in 1987)
- Convention on the Rights of the Child (ratified by Canada in 1991)
- Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (ratified by Canada in 2010)
Human rights abuses
Historical cases
Indigenous peoples
Main article: Canadian genocide of Indigenous peoplesThroughout the history of Canada, the Canadian government (its colonial predecessors and settlers) have been accused of many atrocities variously described as ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, ethnocide and genocide, against the Indigenous peoples in Canada. The term cultural genocide began to be utilized in the 1990s when researchers and Indigenous leaders started to declare the actions of churches and the government regarding residential schools were genocidal. There is debate among scholars about the designation used and if the term genocide legally applies to Canada's experience.
Canada is a settler-colonial nation whose initial economy relied on farming and exporting natural resources like fur, fish, and lumber. This resulted in the dispossession of lands and forced migration of Indigenous peoples using various justifications. The Canadian government implemented policies such as the Indian Act, health-care segregation, residential schools and displacement that attempted forced assimilation of Indigenous peoples into Euro-Canadian culture while asserting control over the land and its resources. Despite current views that might define these actions as racist or genocidal, they were seen as progressive at the time. In response, Indigenous communities mobilized to resist colonial policies and assert their rights to self-determination and sovereignty.Chinese immigration tax
Main article: Chinese head tax in CanadaThe Chinese head tax was a fixed fee charged to each Chinese person entering Canada. The head tax was first levied after the Canadian parliament passed the Chinese Immigration Act of 1885 and was meant to discourage Chinese people from entering Canada after the completion of the Canadian Pacific Railway. The tax was abolished by the Chinese Immigration Act of 1923, which stopped Chinese immigration altogether, except for business people, clergy, educators, students, and other categories.
South Asian immigrants
Main article: Komagata Maru incidentThe Komagata Maru incident involved the Japanese steamship Komagata Maru, on which a group of people from British India attempted to migrate to Canada in April 1914, but most were denied entry and forced to return to Budge Budge, near Calcutta (present-day Kolkata). There, the Indian Imperial Police attempted to arrest the group leaders. A riot ensued, and they were fired upon by the police, resulting in some deaths.
Komagata Maru sailed from British Hong Kong, via Shanghai, China, and Yokohama, Japan, to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, on April 4, 1914, carrying 376 passengers from Punjab province in British India. The passengers were 337 Sikhs, 27 Muslims and 12 Hindus, all Punjabis and British subjects. Of these 376 passengers, 24 were admitted to Canada, but the other 352 were not allowed to disembark in Canada, and the ship was forced to leave Canadian waters. The ship was escorted by HMCS Rainbow, one of Canada's first two naval vessels. This was one of several incidents in the early 20th century in which exclusion laws in Canada and the United States were used to exclude immigrants of Asian origin.Internment camps
Ukrainian Canadians
Main article: Ukrainian Canadian internmentThe Ukrainian Canadian internment was part of the confinement of "enemy aliens" in Canada during and for two years after the end of the First World War, lasting from 1914 to 1920, under the terms of the War Measures Act. About 4,000 Ukrainian men and some women and children of Austro-Hungarian citizenship were kept in twenty-four internment camps and related work sites – also known, at the time, as concentration camps. Many were released in 1916 to help with the mounting labour shortage.
Japanese Canadians
Main article: Japanese Canadian internmentJapanese Canadian internment refers to confinement of Japanese Canadians in British Columbia during World War II. The internment began in December 1941, after the attack by carrier-borne forces of Imperial Japan on American naval and army facilities at Pearl Harbor. The Canadian federal government gave the internment order based on speculation of sabotage and espionage, although the RCMP and defence department lacked proof. Many interned children were brought up in these camps, including David Suzuki, Joy Kogawa, and Roy Miki. The Canadian government promised the Japanese Canadians that their property and finances would be returned upon release; however, these assets were sold off cheaply at auctions.
Italian Canadians
Main article: Italian Canadian internment Italian Canadian internment was the removal and internment of Italian Canadians during World War II following Italy's declaration of war against the United Kingdom on June 10, 1940. Through the War Measures Act, the government of Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King gave itself the power to suspend habeas corpus, revoke rights, seize property and arrest those who were deemed a threat to the safety of Canada—labelling 31,000 Italian Canadians as "enemy aliens". Between 1940 and 1943, between 600 and 700 Italian Canadian men were arrested and sent to internment camps as potentially dangerous "enemy aliens" with alleged fascist connections. In the decades that followed, political apologies were made for the internment of Italian Canadians.International cases
Somalia Affair
Main article: Somalia AffairCanadian peacekeepers have been accused of being complicit in human rights abuses abroad, notably in 1993 when the Canadian Armed Forces were deployed during the Somali Civil War to support UNOSOM I in a peace enforcement capacity. Soldiers from the Canadian Airborne Regiment tortured and killed a 16-year-old youth who broke into the encampment. Known as the Somalia affair, the incident has been described as "the darkest era in the history of the Canadian military" and led to the regiment's disbandment.
Contemporary issues
Clean water access in First Nation communities
Main article: Long-term drinking water advisoriesMany First Nation communities throughout Canada experience frequent and long term drinking water advisories, the longest of which at Neskantaga First Nation having been in continual effect since 1995. Access to safe drinking water is classified as a human right by many international treaties ratified by Canada, including the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The failure to adequately address the water advisories has led to condemnation by many human rights bodies including the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In 2015 the Canadian government committed to ending all long term drinking water advisories by March 2021 and would successfully reduce the number of water advisories by 81% as of February 2023. While the Canadian government would fail to meet its 2021 deadline, efforts are ongoing, however no new deadline has been set, with 32 advisories still being in effect as of February 2023.
Disabled
Main article: Disability in CanadaDespite significant gains for people with disabilities in recent decades, there is historical and modern discrimination issues. People with disabilities have faced institutionalization, involuntary sterilization, employment denialism and emotional and physical violence. Those with disabilities continue to have lower educational achievement, higher unemployment rates, and are more likely to experience low income and inadequate housing compared to those without disabilities. Canada's provincial disability programs do not provide sufficient income to recipients to enable them to afford typical food and housing costs of $341 per month and $1529/month for a studio apartment respectively. In Ontario and British Columbia, disability support program payments max out at $1308 and $1483.50 per month, respectively, for an individual.
Missing and murdered Indigenous females
Main article: Missing and Murdered Indigenous WomenWithin Canada, indigenous women and girls are disproportionately the victims of kidnaping and murder with thousands of such cases occurring in the past 30 years. Indigenous women have been found to represent 10% of all women reported missing for longer than 30 days, and are 6 times more likely to be the victims of homicide compared to non-indigenous women. As a result of the crisis the federal government and all ten provincial governments conducted a National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women from 2016 to 2019, with the inquiry concluding that the crisis represented a continued “race, identity and gender-based genocide.”
Racial profiling and excessive force used by law enforcement
Further information: Police brutality against Indigenous Canadians and Criminal sentencing of Indigenous peoples in CanadaThe issue of excessive police force incidents in Canada has been a topic of concern for many years. There have been numerous cases where individuals have been subjected to unnecessary and excessive force by law enforcement officers. These incidents have raised questions about the accountability and oversight of police forces in Canada.
The use of excessive force by police officers disproportionately affects marginalized communities in Canada, including Indigenous peoples, racialized communities, and those experiencing mental health crises. Studies have also shown that individuals from these communities are more likely to be subjected to increased levels of incarnation.
Bill 101 in Quebec
Further information: Children of Bill 101The Charter of the French Language, also known as Bill 101 in Quebec is a statute passed by the National Assembly of Quebec in 1977, the "language Charter" The law was enacted to propagate the French language and restrict the use of English. For example, the current law specifies that commercial outdoor signs can be multilingual so long as French is markedly predominant. In 1993, the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled that Quebec's sign laws broke an international covenant on civil and political rights. "A State may choose one or more official languages," the committee wrote, "but it may not exclude, outside the spheres of public life, the freedom to express oneself in a language of one's choice."
Bill 21 in Quebec
The Act respecting the laicity of the State introduced and commonly referred to as Bill 21 or Law 21, is a statute passed by the National Assembly of Quebec in 2019. Human rights issue that has been raised in relation to this law is the right to freedom of religion. The Act prohibits certain public employees, such as teachers and judges, from wearing religious symbols at work, which can limit their ability to freely practice their faith. Some argue this goes against the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the right to freedom of religion. Some also argue that the Act targets certain religious groups, particularly Muslim women who wear headscarves, by singling them out and prohibiting them from wearing their religious symbols in public positions.
Refugees, asylum seekers and migrants
Further information: Immigration detention § CanadaA record 405,000 immigrants were admitted in 2021. Canada leads the world in refugee resettlement; it resettled more than 47,600 in 2022. Immigration detention centers are meant to house individuals who are awaiting deportation or undergoing immigration proceedings, but they have become sites of mistreatment and human rights violations. Reports have surfaced detailing instances of physical abuse, lack of access to medical care, and discriminatory practices within these facilities. One of the main issues facing asylum seekers in Canada is the lack of access to legal representation and support. The lengthy processing times for asylum claims can leave individuals and families in a state of limbo, unsure of their fate and vulnerable to exploitation.
International indices
Main article: International rankings of CanadaFreedom indices produced by several non-governmental organizations publishes assessments of political rights and civil liberties for countries around the world.
According to Freedom in the World, an annual report by US-based think-tank Freedom House, which rates political rights and civil liberties, in 2023 Canada was ranked "Free" (the highest possible rating), with a Global Freedom Score of 97 out of 100.
According to the Democracy Index, an annual index published by the U.K.-based Economist Intelligence Unit, that measures pluralism, civil liberties, and the state of democracy, in 2023 Canada was ranked 13th out of 167 countries and received a score of 8.69 out of 10.00.
According to the annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders, Canada ranked 14th out of 180 countries in 2024, up one spot from 15th in 2023 and from 19th in 2022.
According to the annual Corruption Perceptions Index, published by Transparency International, Canada was ranked 12th out of 180 countries from the top least corrupt in 2024.
The Index of Economic Freedom an annual index by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal to measure the degree of economic freedom, ranks Canada 14th out of 177 in 2024, with a score of 73.7 out of 100.
See also
References
- Schabas, William (1998). "Canada and the Adoption of Universal Declaration of Human Rights" (PDF). McGill Law Journal. 43: 403.
- Joseph E. Magnet, Constitutional Law of Canada, 8th ed., Part VI, Chapter 1 Archived October 8, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, Juriliber, Edmonton (2001). URL accessed on March 18, 2006.
- Church, Joan; Schulze, Christian; Strydom, Hennie (2007). Human rights from a comparative and international law perspective. Unisa Press. p. 82. ISBN 978-1-86888-361-5.
- Christopher MacLennan (2004). Toward the Charter: Canadians and the Demand for a National Bill of Rights, 1929–1960. McGill-Queen's Press – MQUP. p. 119. ISBN 978-0-7735-2536-8.
- J. M. Bumsted (2003). Canada's Diverse Peoples: A Reference Sourcebook. ABC-CLIO. p. 229. ISBN 978-1-57607-672-9.
- LaSelva, S.V. (1996). The Moral Foundations of Canadian Federalism: Paradoxes, Achievements, and Tragedies of Nationhood. McGill-Queen's University Press. p. 86. ISBN 978-0-7735-1422-5. Retrieved November 2, 2024.
- ^ "The rights and freedoms the Charter protects". Ministère de la Justice. April 12, 2018. Retrieved November 3, 2024.
- "International Human Rights Treaties to which Canada is a Party". Ministère de la Justice. November 14, 2016. Retrieved October 29, 2024.
- "Canada: Freedom in the World 2023 Country Report". Freedom House. Retrieved November 3, 2024.
- Amanat, Hayatullah (September 8, 2023). "Canada ranks as 2nd-best country in 2023: U.S. News". CTVNews. Retrieved November 3, 2024.
- "World Report 2020: Rights Trends in Canada". Human Rights Watch. December 13, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2024.
- "Canada "a welcome ally" in advancing human rights around the world – Bachelet". OHCHR. June 19, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2024.
- Nancy Holmes, "Human Rights and the Courts in Canada", Publications Canada, Law and Government Division, BP-279E, November 1991, revised October 2001.
- Canadian Heritage (October 23, 2017). "About human rights". Canada.ca. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- Marie-Yosie Saint-Cyr, "The Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal Eliminated", Slaw – Canada’s online legal magazine, August 4, 2011.
- Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission: Filing a Complaint.
- Canadian Heritage (October 23, 2017). "About human rights complaints". Canada.ca. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
- "The rights and freedoms the Charter protects". Department of Justice Canada. April 12, 2018. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- "Who Does the Charter Apply to?". Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- "Section 11 – General: legal rights apply to those "charged with an offence"". Ministère de la Justice. November 9, 1999. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- "Freedom of Religion - by Marlene Hilton Moore". McMurtry Gardens of Justice. Retrieved June 12, 2023.
- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 2(a).
- ^ Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 15.
- R v Big M Drug Mart Ltd., 1 SCR 295, at para. 94.
- Richard Moon, "The public funding of Catholic schools in Ontario is unstable and unprincipled", CBC News, 28 May 2018.
- Cristin Schmitz, "SCC Affirms 7-2 Ontario and B.C. Regulators' Denial of Accreditation to TWU's Proposed Law School" Archived December 4, 2022, at the Wayback Machine, The Lawyer's Daily, LexisNexis Canada, 15 June 2018.
- Canadian Human Rights Commission Statement: "Denying the Rights of One Group of People Puts Everyone's Rights at Risk", 29 March 2019: "The Canadian Human Rights Commission is deeply concerned by Quebec’s announcement this week that it will seek to ban religious symbols for all provincial public servants in roles such as, police officers, judges, teachers and senior officials."
- Kathleen Harris, "Trinity Western loses fight for Christian law school as court rules limits on religious freedom 'reasonable' ", CBC News, 16 June 2018.
- Reference re Bill 30, An Act to Amend the Education Act (Ont.), 1 SCR 1148.
- Adler v. Ontario, 3 SCR 609.
- Waldman v Canada, Communication No. 694/1996, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/67/D/694/1996 (1999).
- UN Human Rights Committee, Report of the Human Rights Committee, Volume I: Eighty-fifth Session (17 October-3 November 2005), Eighty-sixth Session (13-31 March 2006), Eighty-seventh Session (10-28 July 2006), 85th Sess, UN DOC A/61/40 (1 December 2006) 20 at 24.
- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 2(b).
- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 1.
- Julian Walker, "Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression: Legal Boundaries in Canada", Library of Parliament Research Publications, No. 2018-25-E, Library of Parliament, 2018.
- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 2(c).
- Reference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta.), 1 SCR 313.
- Vilko Žbogar, et al. "Forcible Removal of Peaceful Protests in Canada: Submission to United Nations, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression." The Law Union of Ontario, November 18. 2011.
- Alexandra Theodorakidis, "Bill C-51, Freedom of Assembly and Canadians' Ability to Protest." Archived June 30, 2022, at the Wayback Machine Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, 25 June 2015.
- "CSIS surveillance of pipeline protesters faces federal review", CBC News, September 27, 2018.
- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 2(d).
- "Scope of freedom of association", Charterpedia, Section 2(d) – Freedom of association, Department of Justice Canada, July 31, 2023.
- "Freedom from compelled association", Charterpedia, Section 2(d) – Freedom of association, Department of Justice Canada, July 31, 2023
- R v Advance Cutting & Coring Ltd., 3 SCR 209, at paras 19, 195, 196, 220.
- Human Rights Canada Archived December 3, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
- Reading, Charlotte, and Sarah de Leeuw. "Aboriginal experiences with racism and its impacts." Technical Report. Prince George, British Columbia, Canada: National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health, 2014.
- ^ Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, Report of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent on its mission to Canada, UNHRC, 36th Sess, UN DOC A/HRC/36/60/Add.1 (16 August 2017) at 2-3.
- Mar, Lisa Rose. “Beyond Being Others: Chinese Canadians as National History.” The British Columbian Quarterly, No. 156/7, 1 May 2008, pp. 13–34.
- Sunahara, Ann Gomer. The Politics of Racism: the Uprooting of Japanese Canadians during the Second World War. J. Lorimer, 1981.
- Johnston, Hugh. The East Indians in Canada. No. 5. Ottawa: Canadian Historical Association, 1984.
- Robinson, Ira. A History of antisemitism in Canada. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press, 2015.
- Helly, Denise. "Islamophobia in canada? women's rights, modernity, secularism." Religions in the Public Sphere: Accommodating Religious Diversity in the Post-Secular Era, Recode. Responding to Complex Diversity in Europe and Canada, Working Paper No. 11, 2012.
- Simpson, Laura. "Violent victimization and discrimination among visible minority populations, Canada, 2014." Juristat: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada, Apr. 12. 2018.
- "10 striking signs from the Women's March in Toronto". CBC News. January 21, 2017. Retrieved January 23, 2017.
- Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 28.
- Diana Majury, "The Charter, Equality Rights, and Women: Equivocation and Celebration", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, vol. 40, no. 3, 2002, 297-336, at pp. 307–308.
- ^ Victoria Bromley (2012). Feminisms Matter: Debates, Theories, Activism. University of Toronto Press. pp. 26–32. ISBN 978-1-4426-0502-2.
- Radha Jhappan (2002). Women's Legal Strategies in Canada. University of Toronto Press. pp. 335–338. ISBN 978-0-8020-7667-0.
- R v Morgentaler, 1 SCR 30.
- “Canada Ratifies United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.” Ccdonline, Council of Canadians with Disabilities, 11 Mar. 2010, ccdonline.ca/en/international/un/canada/crpd-pressrelease-11March2010.
- Egan v. Canada, 2 S.C.R. 514 at para. 5, finding sexual orientation to be an analogous ground under the Charter but upholding the exclusion of same-sex partners from the definition of spouse in the Old Age Security Act; see also Vriend v. Alberta, 1 S.C.R. 493 (reading “sexual orientation” into the prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Individual’s Rights Protection Act).
- C.F. v. Alberta (Vital Statistics), ABQB 237, par. 39.
- Heritage, Canadian (February 19, 2021). "English and French: Towards a substantive equality of official languages in Canada". Canada.ca. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- Canadian Human Rights Act, RSC 1985, c. C H-6, s. 2.
- Canadian Human Rights Act, s 3.
- ^ Canadian Human Rights Act, SC 1977, c. 33.
- ^ An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and to amend certain other Acts in consequence thereof, SC 1980-81-82-83, c 143, s. 2.
- Canada Elections Act, SC 2000, c. 9, s. ss 119(1)(d), 121(1), 154(1)(2), 168(6), 243(1).
- Canada Evidence Act, RSC 1985, c. C-5, s. 6(1),(2).
- ^ Employment Equity Act, SC 1995, c. 44.
- Government of Canada: Registered Disability Savings Plan.
- Government of Canada: Tax Credits and Deductions for Persons with Disabilities.
- Government of Canada: Rights of LGBTI persons.
- Annette Nierobisz, Mark Searl, and Charles Théroux, Human Rights Commissions and Public Policy: The Role of the Canadian Human Rights Commission in Advancing Sexual Orientation Equality Rights in Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission: 2008).
- Canadian Human Rights Commission: Transgender people have the same right to respect and dignity as everyone else in Canada, May 17, 2016.
- Nina Dragicevic, "Canada’s gender identity rights Bill C-16 explained", CBCDOCSPOV.
- Peter W. Hogg, "Canada: The Constitution and same-sex marriage", (2006) International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol 4, No 3, 712–721.
- Privy Council Office. “About the LGBTQ2 Secretariat.” Canada.ca, Government of Canada, 17 May 2018.
- Kathleen Harris, " 'Our Collective Shame': Trudeau Delivers Historic Apology to LGBT Canadians", CBC News, November 29, 2017.
- Government of Canada: What is Expungement?
- Expungement of Historically Unjust Convictions Act, SC 2018, c. 11.
- Bliss v Attorney General of Canada, 1 SCR 183.
- Government of Canada, Public Services and Procurement Canada (July 1, 2002). "History of employment equity in the public service and the Public Service Commission of Canada / by the Equity and Diversity Directorate. : SC3-159/2011E-PDF - Government of Canada Publications - Canada.ca". publications.gc.ca. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
- Canadian Heritage (June 3, 2024). "About the Canadian Multiculturalism Act". Canada.ca. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- "Charterpedia". Section 32(1) – Application of the Charter. November 9, 1999. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- ^ Gallagher-Louisy, Cathy and Jiwon Chun. "Overview of Human Rights Codes by Province and Territory in Canada." Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion. January 2018.
- "Canadian Human Rights Act". Site Web de la législation (Justice). August 19, 2024. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- Audit and Evaluation Sector Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. “Evaluation of the Income Assistance Program.” Indian and Northern Affairs., 2007, pp. 32–33. Government of Canada Publications, publications.gc.ca/site/eng/479530/publication.html.
- "Overview of Human Rights Codes by Province and Territory in Canada" (PDF). Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion. January 2018. Retrieved September 21, 2020.
- "Human Rights". The Canadian Encyclopedia. June 6, 1944. Retrieved October 31, 2024.
- "A collection of the acts passed in the Parliame... - Canadiana Online". www.canadiana.ca.
- "A collection of the acts passed in the Parliame... - Canadiana Online". www.canadiana.ca.
- Treaty of Paris, 1763, article IV.
- ^ "Avalon Project - Great Britain : Parliament - The Quebec Act: October 7, 1774". avalon.law.yale.edu.
- "THE CATHOLIC RELIEF ACT, 1829". members.pcug.org.au.
- An Act to repeal so much of the Act of the Parliament of Great Britain passed in the Thirty-first year of the Reign of King George the Third, and Chaptered Thirty-one, as relates to Rectories, and the presentation of Incumbents to the same, and for other purposes connected with such Rectories, Statutes of the Province of Canada, 14-15 Vict. (1851), c. 175, Preamble and s. 1.
- Branch, Legislative Services (July 30, 2015). "Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act". laws-lois.justice.gc.ca.
- Branch, Legislative Services (July 30, 2015). "Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act". laws-lois.justice.gc.ca.
- ^ Branch, Legislative Services (July 30, 2015). "Consolidated federal laws of canada, Access to Information Act". laws-lois.justice.gc.ca.
- Coal Mines Regulation Act, RSBC 1897, c. 138, s. 4.
- Union Colliery Co. of British Columbia v. Bryden, UKPC 58, AC 580 (JCPC).
- Provincial Elections Act, RSBC 1897, c. 67, s. 8.
- Cunningham v Homma, UKPC 60, 9 AC 151 (JCPC).
- Canada, Supreme Court of (January 1, 2001). "Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search". scc-csc.lexum.com.
- An Act to prevent the Employment of Female Labour in Certain Circumstances, Statutes of Saskatchewan 1912, c. 17, s. 1.
- Canada, Supreme Court of (January 1, 2001). "Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search". scc-csc.lexum.com.
- The King v Desmond (1947), 20 MPR 297 (NS SC), at 299–301.
- "Canada's Vertical $10 Note". www.bankofcanada.ca.
- Lagerquist, Jeff (March 8, 2018). "'Our family will go down in history': Desmond's sister moved by new $10 bill". CTVNews.
- "Viola Desmond | Historica Canada". www.historicacanada.ca.
- Canada, Supreme Court of (January 1, 2001). "Supreme Court of Canada - SCC Case Information - Search". scc-csc.lexum.com.
- "Sources of Canadian Law" . Department of Justice Canada. Retrieved March 20, 2006.
- Constitutional Law Group. Canadian Constitutional Law (3rd ed.). Toronto: Edmond Montgomery Publications. p. 635.
- Reference Re Alberta Statutes, SCR 100; appeal dismissed, UKPC 46.
- ^ "Saskatchewan, the Patriation of the Constitution and the Enactment of the Charter: Looking Back and Looking Forward – Canadian Journal of Human Rights".
- ^ The Saskatchewan Bill of Rights Act, 1947, SS 1947, c. 35.
- Bill of Rights, 1688 (Eng), 1 Will & Mar (2d Sess), c 2.
- Branch, Legislative Services (December 31, 2002). "Consolidated federal laws of canada, Canadian Bill of Rights". laws-lois.justice.gc.ca.
- Original citation: S.C. 1976-77, c. 33, s. 1; current citation: R.S.C. 1985, c. H-6.
- Canadian Human Rights Act, s. 3(1).
- Kirkup, Kyle. "Canadian Human Rights Act". The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 1, 2023.
- ^ Heritage, Canadian (October 23, 2017). "Human rights treaties". Canada.ca. Retrieved October 31, 2024.
- Heritage, Canadian (December 10, 2023). "Commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights". Canada.ca. Retrieved October 28, 2024.
- "Canada's approach to advancing human rights". GAC. October 16, 2015. Retrieved October 28, 2024.
- "Human Rights in Canada". Canadian Human Rights Commission. September 10, 2024. Retrieved October 28, 2024.
- ^ Eid, Elisabeth. "Interaction between international and domestic human rights law: A Canadian perspective." International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2001, pp. 2–3.
- R. v. Hape, 2007 SCC 26, 2 S.C.R. 292, at para 39. "In my view, following the common law tradition, it appears that the doctrine of adoption operates in Canada such that prohibitive rules of customary international law should be incorporated into domestic law in the absence of conflicting legislation."
- "The History of Violence Against Indigenous Peoples Fully Warrants the Use of the Word "Genocide"". Canadian Historical Association. Retrieved November 14, 2024.
The Canadian Historical Association, which represents 650 professional historians from across the country, including the main experts on the long history of violence and dispossession Indigenous peoples experienced in what is today Canada, recognizes that this history fully warrants our use of the word genocide.
- Woolford 2009, p. 81; Green 2023; MacDonald & Hudson 2012, pp. 430–431; Dhamoon 2016, p. 10
- "Genocide and Indigenous Peoples in Canada". The Canadian Encyclopedia. November 2, 2020. Archived from the original on August 2, 2024.
- MacDonald 2015, pp. 419–420.
- Smith, Donald B.; Miller, J. R. (September 11, 2019). "No Genocide". Literary Review of Canada. Archived from the original on April 22, 2024. Retrieved September 3, 2024.
- Dhamoon 2016, pp. 14–15.
- Rubinstein, W. D. (2004). "Genocide and Historical Debate: William D. Rubinstein Ascribes the Bitterness of Historians' Arguments to the Lack of an Agreed Definition and to Political Agendas". History Today. 54. Archived from the original on January 31, 2013. Retrieved February 10, 2019.
- MacDonald 2015, pp. 411–413, 422–425.
- Canada, Citizenship (September 1, 2009). "Canada's History". Canada.ca. Retrieved December 12, 2024.
- "Genocide and Indigenous Peoples in Canada". The Canadian Encyclopedia. June 6, 1944. Retrieved November 15, 2024.
- ^ Richardson, Benjamin (2020). Richardson, Benjamin J. (ed.). From student strikes to the extinction rebellion: new protest movements shaping our future. Cheltenham, UK Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. p. 41. ISBN 978-1-80088-109-9.
Canada is a settler colonial state, whose sovereignty and political economy is premised on the dispossession of Indigenous peoples and exploitation of their land base' (2015:44). Many of the most egregious genocidal...
- Williams, Kimberly (2021). Stampede: Misogyny, White Supremacy and Settler Colonialism. Fernwood Publishing. ISBN 9781773632179.
Canada is a settler colonial state, it is also what hooks (Jhally 1997) calls a white supremacist capitalist heteropatriarchy...
- Lightfoot et al. 2021, pp. 134–135.
- "Indigenous Peoples and Government Policy in Canada". The Canadian Encyclopedia. June 6, 1944. Retrieved November 20, 2024.
- Gentles, Ian James (October 4, 2023). "Not a Genocide : Part 1: Disease and Nutrition". IRSRG. Retrieved December 12, 2024.
- Do, Minh (October 31, 2023). "Salient Indigenous Acts of Resistance in Canada, 2010–2020: Current Trends". Canadian Journal of Political Science. 56 (4). Cambridge University Press (CUP): 936–949. doi:10.1017/s0008423923000513. ISSN 0008-4239.
- James Morton. "In the Sea of Sterile Mountains: The Chinese in British Columbia". Vancouver, BC: J. J. Douglas, 1974.
- "Komagata Maru". The Canadian Encyclopedia. June 6, 1944. Retrieved November 9, 2024.
- "Komagata Maru incident (1914)". Dictionary of Canadian Biography. Retrieved July 27, 2024.
- Johnston, Hugh (February 7, 2006). "Komagata Maru; The Canadian Encyclopedia". www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca. Archived from the original on April 5, 2021. Retrieved April 5, 2021.
- The Voyage of the Komagata Maru: the Sikh challenge to Canada's colour bar. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. 1989. pp. 81, 83. ISBN 978-0-7748-0340-3.
- "The hidden history of Ukrainians imprisoned in Canadian labour camps in WW I". CBC. May 15, 2023. Retrieved April 30, 2024.
- "Internment of Ukrainians in Canada 1914-1920". Retrieved April 1, 2010.
- Maryka Omatsu, Bittersweet Passage and the Japanese Canadian Experience (Toronto: Between the Lines, 1992), 12.
- "Jap Expropriation Hearing May Last 3 Years, Is Estimate," Globe and Mail (Toronto: January 12, 1948)
- "Canada declares war on Italy". cbc.ca. June 10, 1940. Archived from the original on June 22, 2011.
- DiStefano, Daniela (August 13, 2012). "Tracing the Forgotten History of Italian-Canadian Internment Camps". Archived from the original on January 12, 2020. Retrieved January 12, 2020.
- Razack, Sherene (2000). "From the". Cultural Anthropology. 15 (1). : 127–163. doi:10.1525/can.2000.15.1.127. ISSN 0886-7356. JSTOR 656642.
- Thakur, Ramesh (1994). "From Peacekeeping to Peace Enforcement: The UN Operation in Somalia". The Journal of Modern African Studies. 32 (3). Cambridge University Press: 387–410. doi:10.1017/S0022278X00015159. ISSN 0022-278X. JSTOR 161981. Retrieved April 11, 2024.
- Kim Richard Nossal (2002). Diplomatic Departures: Conservative Era in Canadian Foreign Policy. UBC Press. p. 120. ISBN 978-0-7748-0865-1.
- Farnsworth, Clyde H (November 27, 1994). "Torture by Army Peacekeepers in Somalia Shocks Canada". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 1, 2011.
- Dawson, G. (2011). "Here Is Hell": Canada's Engagement in Somalia. UBC Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-7748-4016-3. Archived from the original on March 15, 2024. Retrieved March 5, 2024.
- ^ Foot, Richard (August 2, 2019). "Canadian Peacekeepers in Somalia". www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca. Historica Canada. Archived from the original on March 12, 2024. Retrieved February 26, 2024.
- Sherene Razack (2004). Dark threats and white knights: the Somalia Affair, peacekeeping, and the new imperialism. University of Toronto Press. p. 4. ISBN 978-0-8020-8663-1.
- Cohen, S.A. (2010). Israel's Armed Forces in Comparative Perspective. BESA studies in international security. Taylor & Francis. p. 160. ISBN 978-1-135-16956-5. Archived from the original on March 4, 2024. Retrieved February 27, 2024.
- ^ Swampy, Mario; Black, Kerry (May 7, 2021). "Tip of the iceberg: The true state of drinking water advisories in First Nations". UCalgary News. Retrieved April 9, 2023.
- "NESKANTAGA FIRST NATION MARK 28th YEAR IN BOIL WATER ADVISORY". Matawa First Nations. February 1, 2023. Retrieved April 9, 2023.
- ^ Klasing, Amanda (October 23, 2019). "The Human Right to Water". Human Rights Watch.
- ^ Canada, Government of Canada; Indigenous and Northern Affairs (September 27, 2017). "Ending long-term drinking water advisories". Canada.ca. Retrieved April 9, 2023.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "Policy on ableism and discrimination based on disability". Ontario Human Rights Commission. June 27, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2025.
- "Conclusions Serious Problems Experienced by Diverse People with Disabilities: Western Canada". Ministère de la Justice. December 2, 2021. Retrieved January 5, 2025.
- "The Daily — Experiences of violent victimization among persons with mental health-related disabilities in Canada, 2018". Statistics Canada. January 26, 2022. Retrieved January 5, 2025.
- "Canada's Food Price Report 2023_Digital.pdf (dal.ca)" (PDF).
- "January 2024 Rentals.ca Report". Rentals.ca.
- "Average rental prices in Canada surge to record highs in October 2023: report". CTVNews. November 4, 2023. Retrieved February 13, 2024.
- Balintec, Vanessa (July 23, 2023). "Financial support to keep people with disabilities housed falls short of what's needed: advocates". CBC News.
- Cecco, Leyland (December 2, 2022). "'Rage, despair, disgust': Canada reels from killings of Indigenous women". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved April 9, 2023.
- Government of Canada, Department of Justice (October 31, 2017). "Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls - JustFacts". www.justice.gc.ca. Retrieved April 9, 2023.
- Reclaiming Power and Place: the Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (PDF). Vol. 1a. National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. 2019. p. 5. ISBN 978-0-660-29274-8.
- Barrera, Jorge (May 31, 2019). "National inquiry calls murders and disappearances of Indigenous women a 'Canadian genocide'". CBC News. Retrieved April 8, 2023.
- "Police Brutality in Canada : A Bibliography of Books, Reports, & Magazine, Journal and Newspaper Articles". 1982.
- "Press Release: Police-involved deaths on the rise across Canada". CCLA. February 23, 2023. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- ^ Gurmukh, Sunil (September 12, 2024). "Police violations of Charter rights highlight the need for accountability and transparency". The Conversation. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- Krista Stelkia (July 15, 2020). ""Police Brutality in Canada: A Symptom of Structural Racism and Colonial Violence"".
- Johnson, William (October 3, 2003). "Opinion: Sign language makes noise at the UN". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- "What's in Quebec's secularism bill: Religious symbols, uncovered faces and a charter workaround". CBC. March 28, 2019. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- "Bill 21". CCLA. November 21, 2023. Retrieved November 1, 2024.
- Sangani, Priyanka (February 15, 2022). "Canada to take in 1.3 million immigrants in 2022–24". The Economic Times. Archived from the original on February 15, 2022.
- Kim, Soo-Jung (June 14, 2023). "UNHCR calls for concerted action as forced displacement hits new record in 2022". UNHCR Canada. Retrieved July 4, 2024.
- "Canada: Abuse, Discrimination in Immigration Detention". Human Rights Watch. June 17, 2021. Retrieved November 2, 2024.
- Alhmidi, Maan (June 17, 2021). "Asylum seekers face abuse, discrimination in Canada's immigration detention system: report". Global News. Retrieved November 2, 2024.
- "Freedom in the World Research Methodology". Freedom House.
- "Canada: Freedom in the World 2024 Country Report". Freedom House. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
- "Democracy Index 2023". Economist Intelligence Unit. February 29, 2024. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
- "2024 World Press Freedom Index – journalism under political pressure". RSF. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
- "2023 Corruption Perceptions Index: Explore the results". Transparency.org. January 30, 2024. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
- The Heritage Foundation. "Index of Economic Freedom: All Country Scores". Index of Economic Freedom. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
Sources
- Dhamoon, Rita Kaur (2016). "Re-presenting Genocide: The Canadian Museum of Human Rights and Settler Colonial Power". The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics. 1 (1): 5–30. doi:10.1017/rep.2015.4.
- Green, Sarah (August 23, 2023). "The 'silent genocide' haunting Canada's liberal dream". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on July 13, 2024.
- Lightfoot, Kent G.; Nelson, Peter A.; Grone, Michael A.; Apodaca, Alec (2021). "Pathways to Persistence: Divergent Native engagements with sustained colonial permutations in North America". In Panich, Lee M.; Gonzalez, Sara L. (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of the Archaeology of Indigenous-Colonial Interaction in the Americas. Routledge. pp. 129–146. ISBN 978-0-429-27425-1.
- MacDonald, David B. (October 2, 2015). "Canada's history wars: indigenous genocide and public memory in the United States, Australia and Canada". Journal of Genocide Research. 17 (4): 411–431. doi:10.1080/14623528.2015.1096583.
- MacDonald, David B.; Hudson, Graham (2012). "The Genocide Question and Indian Residential Schools in Canada". Canadian Journal of Political Science. 45 (2): 427–449. doi:10.1017/s000842391200039x.
- Woolford, Andrew (2009). "Ontological Destruction: Genocide and Canadian Aboriginal Peoples". Genocide Studies and Prevention. 4 (1): 81–97. doi:10.3138/gsp.4.1.81.
Further reading
- MacLennan, C. (2003). Toward the Charter: Canadians and the Demand for a National Bill of Rights, 1929-1960. McGill-Queen's University Press. ISBN 978-0-7735-2536-8.
- Lambertson, R. (2005). Repression and Resistance: Canadian Human Rights Activists, 1930-1960. Canadian Social History. University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-0-8020-8921-2.
- Clément, D. (2016). Human Rights in Canada: A History. Laurier studies in political philosophy series. Wilfrid Laurier University Press. ISBN 978-1-77112-163-7.
- Clément, D. (2009). Canada's Rights Revolution: Social Movements and Social Change, 1937-82. UBC Press. ISBN 978-0-7748-5843-4.
- Eliadis, F.P. (2014). Speaking Out on Human Rights: Debating Canada's Human Rights System. McGill-Queen's University Press. ISBN 978-0-7735-4305-8.
- Miron, J. (2009). A History of Human Rights in Canada: Essential Issues. Canadian Scholars' Press Incorporated. ISBN 978-1-55130-356-7.
- Gibson, Dale (1966). "Constitutional Amendment and the Implied Bill of Rights" (PDF). McGill Law Journal. 12 (4): 497–501. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 27, 2017. Retrieved November 2, 2024.
- Hogg, Peter W. (2003). Constitutional Law of Canada (2003 Student ed.). Scarborough: Thomson/Carswell. ISBN 0-45924085-4.
- Adams, Eric M. (2009). The Idea of Constitutional Rights and the Transformation of Canadian Constitutional Law, 1930-1960 (PDF) (JD). University of Toronto.
External links
- Human Rights in Canada - Canadian Human Rights Commission
- Canada’s approach to advancing human rights - Government of Canada
- Human rights in Canada - Amnesty International
Human rights in North America | |
---|---|
Sovereign states | |
Dependencies and other territories |
Canada | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
History |
| ||||
Provinces and territories |
| ||||
Geography |
| ||||
Government |
| ||||
Economy | |||||
Demographics |
| ||||
Society | |||||
Culture |
| ||||
Contents | |||||
Research | |||||