J URISDICTION, E NFORCEMENT, AND G UARANTEE Charter defines the relationship between people, organizations,and companies in Canada and the government

Jurisdiction S.32Enforcement S.24Guarantee S.1 Applies to the relationship between people and their governments( provincial and federal) The Supreme Court of Canada is interpreting and enforcing laws Identifies and guarantees rights and freedoms within reasonable limits-

J URISDICTION - THE AREA OF AUTHORITY THAT DEFINES THE RELATIONS BETWEEN PEOPLE, COMPANIES, AND ORGANIZATIONS IN C ANADA AND THEIR GOVERNMENTS ( FG AND PG S )

E NFORCEMENT OR THE G UARDIAN OF THE C ONSTITUTION Enforcement(The Supreme Court of Canada)= 9 judges Was the right infringed or violated by the government Is the Violation or infringement within a reasonable limit? Is the right in question covered under the charter

E NFORCEMENT 2/ I NTERVENERS Interveners are third-party participants in a legal proceedings; also called friends of the court

I T MAY BE NECESSARY TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THEIR EXERCISE WOULD BE INIMICAL ( OPPOSED ) TO THE REALIZATION OF COLLECTIVE GOALS OF FUNDAMENTAL IMPORTANCE TO THE PEOPLE OF C ANADA. The reason for limiting the Charter must be shown to be important enough to justify the overriding a constitutionally protected right The measure carried out to limit the right must be reasonable and logically connected to the objective for which it was enacted The right must be limited as little as possible The more severe the rights limitation, the more important the objective must be.

G UARANTEE - SECTION 1 GUARANTEES OUR RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, MAKING IT CLEAR THAT THESE RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS ARE NOT ABSOLUTE BUT ARE “ SUBJECT TO REASONABLE LIMITS ” Read the Case on page 85 and answer the following questions: 1. State in your won words the meaning of “ reverse onus in s.8 of the Narcotic Control Act found to be contrary to the Charter. 2. What reason could be considered important enough to satisfy the first criterion used to justify limiting a right? 3. Does the third criterion apply to this case? Is it possible to partially limit the right to be presumed innocent ? Explain.

P LEASE C HECK YOUR A NSWERS 1) Reverse onus means that the burden of proof is on the accused, who must disprove an essential element of an offense. In other words, the accused must prove that he or she did not commit the offence instead of the Crown needing to prove that the accused did commit the offence. Reverse onus breaks the rule of innocent until proven guilty contained in Charter s.11(d),a concept fundamental to Canada’s legal system. 2) The court must decide whether a restriction is justified in a free and democratic society. The Charter guarantees freedom of expression, but hate literature causes such great harm that a limit on it may be regarded by a society as an acceptable restriction. 3) In this case where a guilty verdict could result in a jail sentence, the right to be presumed innocent cannot be partially limited. There are, however, cases where reverse onus has been upheld. 4)