Conclusion

• Author: John Helis
• Pages: 265-272

265

 6

Conclusion

Quasi-constitutional laws protect a broad range of rights through methods

that are distinct from the constitutionally entrenched model of the Charter.

e type of rights protected by quasi-constitutional laws include basic

civil liberties, the right against discrimination, the right to access gov-

ernment information, the right to privacy in both the public and private

sectors, and the protection of an individual’s good reputation. Many of

these dier from the rights in the Charter. Quasi-constitutional laws also

provide distinct methods of upholding rights compared to constitutional

entrenchment, and they thereby strain the stark division traditionally

depicted between legislation and common law on the one hand, and

constitutional law on the other.

Lord Sankey’s famous statement in Edwards v Attorney General of Can-

ada (the Person’s case), about the British North America Act, that “there are

statutes and statutes,” has appropriately been quoted to describe quasi-

constitutional statutes, since they are interpreted and applied in a fash-

ion that recognizes both their increased importance over regular statutes

and their relationship to the Constitution. is begins, at a theoretical

level, with the term “fundamental law,” which has been used to describe

the rights upheld by both the Constitution and quasi-constitutional laws.

Chapter  explored how the concept of fundamental law connotes a link

 Transpacic Tours Ltd (cob CP Air Holidays) v Canada (Director of Investigation and

Research), [] BCJ No  at para  (SC); Edwards v Attorney General of Canada,

[] AC  (JCPC).