Canadian law
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Georgian College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
MISC
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by SuperGiraffe4037
Canadian law
Joshin Joy
200540896
Agreeing to the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which is included in the Constitution Act of 1982 serves as a pillar, within Canada's framework. Section 2 of the Charter guarantees rights and freedoms for all Canadians including the freedom of expression, assembly, and protection against search and seizure (Constitution Act, 1982). This constitutional provision plays a role in upholding principles and safeguarding individual liberties throughout the country. It establishes a structure that supports the values of a democratic society providing comprehensive protection for citizens' rights (Constitution Act, 1982). By enshrining these freedoms, the Charter significantly contributes to fostering a just legal environment in Canada. Its significance goes beyond terms; it also has a broader impact on shaping a society that values and defends the inherent rights and freedoms of its diverse population. Essentially the Charter is a document that reflects Canada's commitment to upholding ideals and providing a strong foundation, for
protecting individual rights.
Disagreeing to
Mandatory Minimum Sentences
On the hand there has been controversy surrounding the use of mandatory minimum sentences, for specific offenses in Canada. Many critics myself included argue that these sentences receive criticism for imposing punishments that may not align perfectly
with the severity of the crimes committed. It's akin to trying to force a peg into a hole – these inflexible sentences often fail to consider the unique circumstances of each case placing judges in a difficult position. There is concern that this lack of flexibility may not align well with the core principles of justice and rehabilitation.
These mandatory minimum sentences have generated discussion within legal circles sparking debates about whether they do more harm than good. It represents a struggle between desiring an approach to sentencing and recognizing the importance of adaptability when dealing with the intricate details of each case. The entire discourse sheds light on how challenging it can be to strike a balance between fairness and effectiveness, within our justice system.
Agreeing with "Is it Right to Break the Law?"
This essay titled "Is it Right to Break the Law?" explores the relationship, between morality and the law. It brings attention to the fact that morality and legality don't always align, prompting us to examine the dilemmas presented by legislation. The tone acknowledges that there are situations where breaking the law may be morally justifiable encouraging readers to move beyond a view of morality and legalities.
I agree with the notion that there are circumstances where it can be ethically acceptable
to break the law especially when those laws are unjust, discriminatory, or fail to address
moral concerns. This perspective emphasizes the significance of considerations in evaluating the legitimacy of frameworks and supports the idea that individuals have a moral obligation to reject unjust laws.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
The article's relevance remains unaffected by its publication date, which is not surprising. The ethical discussion surrounding how morality intersects, with legality is always pertinent as societal norms and values evolve. The essay challenges readers to engage in thinking about the implications of laws fostering a deeper understanding of how moral principles interact with legal systems.
References
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/
https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2021/12/mandatory-minimum-penalties-to-be-
repealed.html