fbpx
Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

לוגו קהלת אנגליתSVG (1)
Search
Close this search box.

What Can We Learn from Canada About Judicial Use of Unwritten Principles?

An interesting 2021 ruling from the Supreme Court of Canada is very relevant to the conversation in Israel about judicial reform: What is the relation between “the language of the constitution” and the “spirit of the constitution”, and is the Court authorized to strike down laws according to unwritten constitutional principles?

One Line Answer:

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the Court identifies the “basic structure” of the constitution by its language and not by amorphous, unwritten principles. Relying on unwritten principles for judicial review of legislation undermines the very idea of a constitution.

According to the Canadian constitution drafted in 1867, the authority to design local government institutions was granted to the regional government. During the 2018 municipal elections for Toronto, (the biggest city in Canada), the regional government of Ontario passed a law reducing the number of representatives for the Toronto municipality from 47 to 25.

The Toronto Municipality petitioned the Court, claiming that the law violated the constitution’s provisions ensuring freedom of speech, freedom of association and the principle of equality. The municipality did not base their claims solely on the constitution’s written provisions, but on the constitution’s unwritten principles as well: democracy and the rule of law. The case moved through the courts till it reached the Supreme Court of Canada.  

The Canadian constitution, according to the Supreme Court of Canada, is comprised of both written and unwritten norms. The latter assist the Court in two ways. First, unwritten principles can serve as an interpretive tool, clarifying legislation’s purpose or the content of rights the laws enumerate. Secondly, these principles can fill the gap of a lacuna.  

However, the Court also explicitly stated that unwritten principles cannot serve as an independent basis for repealing laws – due to their highly abstract nature; because they are not clearly articulated; and since they haven’t gone through parliamentary committee. There is no defined content for the term “democracy” for instance. The Supreme Court of Canada determined that vesting the Court with the authority to interpret abstract principles undermines the will of the people as expressed by the ballot box and the legislative process. Likewise, the Canadian constitution allows for Parliament to overrule the repeal of laws that contradict specific rights enumerated in the constitution; Parliament cannot, however, overcome a court ruling based on an unwritten principle.

The Supreme Court of Canada added that “such attempts [to strike down legislation based on unwritten constitutional principles] trespass into legislative authority to amend the Constitution, thereby raising fundamental concerns about the legitimacy of judicial review and distorting the separation of powers”.

Finally, as opposed to the written language of the constitution, “which promotes legal certainty and predictability in the exercise of judicial review, the nebulous nature of unwritten principles makes them susceptible to be interpreted so as to render many of our written constitutional rights redundant and, in doing so, undermine the delimitation of those rights chosen by our constitutional framers.”

For all of the above, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that legislation could not be repealed on the grounds of unwritten principles.

In Israel, the use of unwritten foundational constitutional principles regarding striking down laws and basic laws has recently been widely discussed. The Supreme Court in Israel would do well to consider the Supreme Court of Canada’s reasoning and excercise caution in such use.  

By: Adv. Avraham Russel Shalev

Further Reading:

Toronto (City) v. Ontario (Attorney General), 2021 SCC

Published originally in the KPF news-sheet, “One Line Answers” (B’Mishpat Echad)

https://scc-csc.lexum.com/…/scc-csc/en/item/19011/index.do

I removed from here a Loop Grid called  Type Posts and Template called Elementor  Loop Writer – small template.

Advanced query options: dynamic related posts

תוכן נוסף

More

Accessibility Toolbar