Life, Liberty, and Security of the Person and the Principles of Fundamental Justice

AuthorRobert J. Sharpe; Kent Roach
Pages244-293
244
CHAPTER 13
LIFE, LIBERTY,
AND SECURITY OF
THE PERSON AND
THE PRINCIPLES OF
FUNDAMENTAL JUSTICE
Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides:
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and
the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the
principles of f undamental justice.
The section is cast in broad language and the scope of the guarantee is
potentially signif‌icant and far-reaching. In an early decision, the Su-
preme Court stated that the process of elaborating the meaning of sec-
tion 7 would necessarily be a gradual and case-by-case exercise.1 This
approach is understandable, for the interpretation of section 7 raises
diff‌icult questions. As we shall see, many of these questions involve
fundamental moral a nd social issues, and call for the courts to consider
the scope and limits of judicial review under the Charter.
Section 7 has had a signif‌icant impact in the criminal law context
where it has been held to extend importa nt procedural a nd subst antive
guarantees to persons accused of crime. That aspect of section 7 is dis-
cussed in Chapter 14, though some major cases involving the criminal
process must be discu ssed in this chapter to the extent that t hey def‌ine
general principles for section 7. This chapter focuses on the impact of
section 7 outside the sphere of guarantees i n the criminal process. Here
it is signif‌icant that section 7 of the Charter, unlike the due process
protections of the American Bill of Rights, does not explicitly protect
1 Rv Morgentaler, [1988] 1 SCR 30 at 51, 44 DLR (4th) 385, Dickson CJC [Morgentaler].
Life, Libert y, and Security of the Person a nd the Principles of Fu ndamental Justic e 245
property rights. Moreover, unlike some other modern rights protection
instruments, section 7 of the Charter does not explicitly protect socio-
economic rights such as the right to welfare or housing or health care.
As will be seen, however, section 7 still has an important and often
controversial role to play outside of the criminal justice context. Should
section 7 be narrowly interpreted to protect little more than procedural
fairness? Or, does the requirement to respect the “principles of funda-
mental justice” demand review of the substantive content of legislation
to ensure that all laws are just and fair? Does section 7 protect the “lib-
erty” to do as one pleases, or should “liberty” be given a narrower inter-
pretation, embracing only physical freedom? All laws constrain “liberty”
in its widest sense. It is a basic tenet of our legal system that one is at
liberty to do as one pleases unless constrained by some positive law. Yet
ours is also a society governed by law and a society that recognizes that
laws, and hence constraint s on liberty, are required to preserve order and
protect the weak and vulnerable.
Does “security of the person” entail the right to own property or the
right to contract for private health insurance? If so, section 7 could help
the “haves” in our society by signif‌icantly constraining governmental
regulatory and redistributive measures. Does “security of the person”
guarantee some minimal level of economic entitlement? If so, section 7
could help the “have-nots” by compelling the creation and extension of
government welfare schemes. Opponents of abortion have argued that
abortion denies the unborn the right to “life,” while pro-choice advo-
cates contend that laws preventing abort ion infringe a woman’s rights to
“liberty” and “security of the person.”
There is also conf‌lict about the sources of the principles of funda-
mental justice. Are they found only in the basic or traditional tenets of
the justice system? Or, can they be informed by changing standards
of domestic and even international justice? Is there a danger of judges
reading their own views of good policy into the principles of funda-
mental justice? How much of a consensus is required be fore a principle
is recognized as a principle of fundamental justice? How do courts dis-
tinguish between legal principles and matters of policy that should be
left to elected governments? Finally, what is the appropriate relation
between section 7 and section 1 of the Charter? Is section 7 of the Char-
ter such a special right that violations of section 7 rights will rarely if
ever be justif‌ied under section 1 of the Charter? Has the reluctance of
courts to hold that violations of section 7 are justif‌ied under section
1 affected the content of the section 7 rights both with respect to the
def‌inition of the rights to life, liberty, and security of the person and
with respect to the def‌inition of the principles of fundamental justice?
THE
CHARTER OF R IGHTS A ND FREEDOMS
246
In this chapter, we canvass the way the courts have responded to
these and other questions. As we shall see, def‌initive answers have yet
to be given in many contentious areas. After three decades of litigation,
the task of def‌ining the outer limits of “life, liberty and security of the
person” as well as the “principles of fundamental justice” is still very
much a work-in-progress.
A. THE REQUIREMENTS OF A SECTION 7
VIOLATION
There are a number of steps in establishing a violation of section 7 of
the Charter. First, the Charter applicant must demonstrate that he or
she falls within the reference to “everyone” in section 7. Establishing
this will be easy in the context of natural persons, but not in the case
of corporations or other artif‌icial entities. Next, the Charter applicant
must demonstrate a violation of the right to life, liberty, or security
of the person. Doing this will be easy in the context of physical dep-
rivations of liberty, but more contentious in the case of other interests.
Demonstrating a violation of the right to life, liberty, or security of
the person, however, is insuff‌icient to make out a section 7 claim. For
example, a person convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to jail
suffers a loss of liberty, but loss of liberty, standing alone, is not con-
trary to t he Charter guarantee. The rights clai mant must proceed to the
f‌inal stage of analysis and show that the denial of a right protected by
section 7 is contrary to t he principles of fundamental justice. The issue
under section 7 is not whether the legislation strikes the right balance
between individual and social interests, but whether it results in the
deprivation of life, liberty, or security of the person in a manner that
does not respect fundamental principles of justice. The claimant under
section 7 should not bear the burden of demonstrating that the state’s
action is disproportionate and unjustif‌ied: in other words, section 7
does not permit “a freestanding inquiry . . . into whether a particular
legislative measure ‘strikes the right balance’ between individual and
societal interests in general.2
If all three elements of the s ection 7 violation have been established,
it is still theoretically possible that the section 7 violation could be jus-
tif‌ied by the government under section 1 of the Charter. Nevertheless,
the courts have indicated that justif‌ications of section 7 violations will
2 R v Malmo-Levine; R v Cain e, [2003] 3 SCR 571 at par a 96 [Malmo-Levine]; Charkaoui
v Canada (Citizenship and Immigratio n), [2007] 1 SCR 350 at para 21 [Charkaoui].

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex