Shared and Bijural Meaning

• Author: Ruth Sullivan
• Pages: 96-113

96

CHA PTER 6

SHARED AND BIJURAL

MEANING

Canada is both a bilingual and a bijural country. The legislation of the

Parliament of Canada, some provinci al legislatures, and all territorial

legislatures is bi lingual in that it is enacted in both French and Engl ish.

And federal legislation is bijural in t hat it applies in both a civil law

context in Quebec and a common law context in other provinces and

the territories.

In some respects, like many nations, Canada is becoming a multilin-

gual, multijural nation. For example, intern ational agreements currently

exert an important inf‌luence on domestic law at both the federal and

provincial levels. Legi slation designed to implement such agreements

may incorporate or adapt provisions th at have been drafted in several

languages and ref‌lect diverse legal systems.

To date, no federal, provincial, or territorial legi slation is enacted in

any Aboriginal l anguage. However, Aboriginal l anguages are used in the

legislative assemblie s of the terr itories, and some legisl ation in Nunavut is

published in the Inuit language, which ha s two written forms: Inuktitut

and Innuinaqtun.1 In addition, traditional knowledge and Aborigina l law

are sometimes incorporated into legi slation.2 It is evident that Aborig-

inal langu ages and law will play a role in the government of Aborig inal

peoples and their relationships w ith other members of Canadian soci-

1 Sections 5 and 7 of t he Off‌icial Lang uages Act, SNu 2008, c 10, authoriz e orders

requirin g publication in Inuktitut, but to date no orde rs have been made.

2 See, for example, the A boriginal Custom Adoption Rec ognition Act, SNWT 1994,

c 26, and the Child and Family Ser vices Act, SY 2008, c 1, s 134.

Shared and Bijural Meaning 97

ety in the future. These developments contribute to a grow ing national

and international law on the drafting and inter pretation of multilingual,

multicultural legal instruments.3

A. BILINGUAL LEGISL AT ION

Under the Constitution of Canada, Acts of the Parliament of Canada

and of the legislatures of Quebec, New Br unswick, and Manitoba must

be printed and published in both French and Engl ish.4 This require-

ment also applies to most regulations m ade under those Acts.5 The same

is required of territorial Acts and regulations, a requirement ref‌lected

in territorial Off‌icial Language Acts.6 Under Ontario’s French Language

Services Act,7 the Acts and most regulations of Ont ario are enacted in

French as well as English. The purpos e of enacting bilingual leg islation

is to permit Canadians who are English or French speaking to have ac-

cess to the law in their own language.

The Supreme Court of Canada has held that when legislation must

be enacted in two lang uages, both language versions have equal status

and are equally authoritative.8 This is known as the equal authenticity

rule, and it is well-establi shed. The implications of the r ule, however, are

open to debate. In the view of Michael Beaupré, who wrote extensively

on the subject, equal authenticity means t hat by itself a single lang uage

version of a bilingual statute is i ncomplete; its true meaning can be de-

termined only by readi ng and correctly interpreting both language ver-

sions.9 It is also pos sible to argue that equal authenticity means t hat each

reader can rely on the version of the statute wr itten in his or her own

3 For further di scussion of these issue s, see Ruth Sullivan, “The Challe nges of

Interpretin g Multilingual, Multijur al Legislation” (2004) 29 Brooklyn Journal of

International Law 1.

4 See the Constitution Act, 1867 (UK), 30 & 31 Vict, c 3, s 133; the Manitoba Act,

1870 (UK), 33 Vict, c 3, s 23; the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to t he

Canada Ac t 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11, s 18.

5 See Blaikie v Quebec (No 2), [1981] 1 SCR 312; Reference Re Language Rights Under

s 23 of Manitoba Act, 1870 and s 133 of Constitution Act , 1867, [1985] 1 SCR 721

[Manitoba Language Refere nce].

6 Off‌icial Lang uages Act, above note 1, ss 5 and 7; Off‌ic ial Languages A ct, RSNWT

1988, c O-1, ss 7 and 12; Langua ges Act, RSY 2002, c 133, s 4.

7 RSO 1990, c F.32, ss 3–4.

8 See Manitoba L anguage Reference, above note 5 at 774–75. Section 18 of the Con-

stitution Act, 1982, above note 4, codif‌ies the equ al authenticity rule for federal

and New Bruns wick legislation.

9 See Rémi Michael B eaupré, Interpreting Biling ual Legislati on, 2d ed (Toronto: Car-

swel l, 1986).