Standing, Suspending, and Sharing: The Limits of the Charter as a Tool of Social Change in Criminal Justice

• Author: Alan N Young
• Pages: 1-48



StandingSuspendingandSharing

THELIMITSOFTHECHART ER

ASATOOLOFSOCIALCHANGEIN

CRIMINALJUSTICE

Alan N Young*

A . INT RODUCTION

There are many who celebrate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a

crowningach ievementandacatalystofprogressivesociala ndpolitical

changeOthersarenot sosangui neandte ndtoview theenactment of

constitutional rights asdoing nothing greaterthanac hievingt heap

pearanceof fairnessa ndpromotingthe legitimization ofacla ssand

race biased judicial processT he truth lies somewhere in between

the praise and condemnation One can not gainsay that over the past

thirtyve years there have been many constitutiona l challenges that

havebrought aboutdramatic andsigni cantchanges in ourlegal and

politicallandscapeW hetherthesedecisionshavealteredorsimplyre

ecttheaspirationandprinciplesofallCanadiansisofnoconsequence

Therewillalwaysbedetractorswhobemoantheriseofjudicialactivism

under the Charterandcontendthatt hejudiciaryi sillequippedt oresolve

 OsgoodeHallLawSchool

 DavidRudovskyTheCriminalJust iceSystemandtheRoleofthePoliceinDavid

KairysedTh ePoliticsofLawAProgressiveCritiqueNYPantheonBookssee

alsoStuar tSheingoldThePoliticsofRightsLawyersPublicPolicyandPoliticalChange

NewHavenCTYaleUniversityPressForaCanadianpersp ectiveonthe

mythofrightsseeM ichaelMandelThe Charte r of Rights and the Legalization of

Politics in Canada TorontoThompsonEducationalPublic ationsinwhichthe

authordiscuss esthepublicrelationsfunc tionoftheCharteranditsroleingivi ng

afailedimpressionofco ncernsforproceduralrig hts

ANY

publicpolicyorpoliticalquestionsbutmoreoftenthannotcomplaints

aboutjudicialcompetencesimplytendtobep oliticalstatementsabout

thedesirabilityofparticu larcourtdecisions

This chapter will eva luatethe ecacy a nd eciency of using the

CharterasatoolforsocialandpoliticalreformThisevaluationwillavoid

anya ssessmentof the desirabilityof particular court decisionsand

willaddressa dierentquestionwhet hertherestill existprocedural

constraints onthe processof constitutional adjudicationthat undercut

theecacyandeciencyofusingconstitutionalrightstoeectpolitical

changeDothepro cessrulesth atgoverntheadminis trationofciviland

criminal justice placeunnecessa ryobstacles int hepathof vindicating

rightsclaimsordotherulesofprocessfacilitatethelaunchingofmeri

toriousconstitutionalclaimsIn lightofmyacademica ndprofessional

experience Iwill limit my analysisto cases involving thelegal rights

provisions of the Charterand whether the process r ules havehad a n

impacti neect ingprogr essivechange in the crimin aljust icesystem

Howeverdespitethisnarrowfocus onthe legalrights provisionsitis

generallyrecogn izedthat someoft hemostdramaticshifts inour pol

iticalla ndscapein recentdecades haveoccurred because ofsuccessful

equality chal lengesu nders ection of the CharterIn excluding con

siderationofsectioncasesitshouldalsoberecognizedthatachapter

ofthisbrevitycanonlyprovideapreliminar yassessmentofwhetherthe

Charterhasbeenaneectivetoolforprogressivesocialchange

In the context of crimin al lawin the past th irtyveyears t here

havebeensomeremarkableadvancesintheprotectionofprivacyandin

facilitatingthe righttoful lanswerand defencebutthepathto change

inthecriminalprocesshasbeen slowandpainful Ultimatelythepos

itiontakenin this chapteris that advancingCharter claims within the

preexistingproc eduralformsofouracceptedsystemofcivil andcrim

inaljusticeisf raughtwithobstaclesandlandminesThedeepst ructure

ofouradversarial systemdesignedto resolvecivila ndcrimina lcases

isill suitedf orthedete rmina tionofcompl expolicy questionsthata ect

theinterests ofthousandsif notmillionsofp eoplewhoarenotbefore

thecourt

Inthe earlyCharterdaysthe OntarioCourt ofAppealwas fondof

noting thatthe Charterdoes not intenda transformation of ourlegal

 RalphCavanaghAusti nSaratThinki ngaboutCourtsTowardandBeyonda

JurisprudenceofJudicia lCompetenceWinterLaw and Society Review

at

Standing, Suspending, and Sharing

systemhoweverw ithoutsome i nstitutional adjustments with in the

preexistingproceduralformsofjusticethereisariskthatthegrowthof

rig htsw ill best ult ied byc umbe rsom eand cost lypr oce sses forv ind ica

tionAlthoughitistritetosaythattheCharteristhesupre melawofth e

landthis basicproposition isoften forgoenasjuriststr ytosq ueeze

constitutional adjudicationi ntothe frameworkof existi ngprivate law

modelsof procedureThe factt hatit isthe supremelaw suggeststh at

itshouldbetreateddierent fromordinarydomesticlawTreatingitas

supremenotonlymeans thatanyinconsistencies foundinthesubsta n

tivecontent of ordin ary law will be held to be of no force and eect

butshouldalsomeanthatanyproceduralobstaclesstandingintheway

ofthe vindication ofcon stitutionalr ightswill also ber elegatedtot he

realmofnoforceandeect

InPart Bof thisc hapterIwill providefour examplesofhow pro

cedural forms tend to constrain the power of the Charter in eec ting

political and legal change These exa mplesrelating to st rip searches

impaireddrivingprostit utionandassistedsuicideshowthattryingto

bringaboutchangewithintheframeworkofaprivatelawmodelofad

judicationcanleadtopyrrhicvic toriesorirresoluteconclusionsInPart

CIwi lldiscuss howanunderstanding ofconstitutional rightsascol

lectiverights wouldleadtoarela xationorremovalof anyprocedural

obstaclesthatundulyencumberthevi ndicationofconstitutionalrights

Fina llyinPar tDIwi llbrie yexplor ewhet hersome ofthe exist ingpr o

ceduralconstrai ntsincludingt herules relatingtost andinglim itation

periodsocia limmun itycostsa ndremedies haveundergone some

degreeofchangetoaccommodatetheuniqueneedsanddemandsofthe

supremelawoftheland

B T H EPR OB LEM O FP Y R R H IC V IC T OR I E S

AND IRRESOLUTE CONCLUSIONS

Whetheraconst itutionalchallengeis successfulornotanexamination

oftheprocessofbring ingthec hallengetocompletionc anrevealsome

oftheproceduralobstaclesthatlieinthepathofvindicatingrightsFour

casestwo obscurea ndtwofamous illustratethe constraints thatcon

ventio nalpr ocedur alform splaceu ponane cienta ndin formed resolu

tionofconstitutionalquestions

 R v AltseimerORdCAquotedinR v CarterORd

CAandR v SeoORdCAinter alia