Law Exam Review

Question 1

What are the 4 driving forces behind the changes in Canadian law today?

Answer 1

Demographics change - and laws need to be changed to reflect that. Population, religion, gender, etc., are never stagnant and are always changing and the law needs to keep up with that change.
Technological Changes - affect the law
Changes in values - affect the law—a person’s principles or standards of behaviour; one’s judgment of what is important in life.
National/State of Emergencies - affect the law

Question 2

What are two technological changes that might affect a change in our laws in the next ten years? Explain your answer.

Answer 2

The Advancement of Artificial Intelligence - as AI expands and can make things such as videos, our laws have to change so that evidence in court has to be proven to be real and not AI-generated
The Expansion of the Internet of Things - as more devices become equipped with internet access and data collection, newer laws need to be created that address user privacy and ensure that our data is not shared
Self-Driving Cars - New tech that we are going to have to navigate

Question 3

Why is it important to change the law as time goes on?

Answer 3

It’s important to change the law as time goes on because our law is in place to protect an everchanging society
Thus, these laws need to reflect our current society and be relevant to the world around us
For example, we may no longer need laws relating to duels and battles to settle disagreements but will need laws surrounding the use of lawyers to settle disagreements
So, the law has to reflect the current society in terms of - changes in demographics, changes in technology, changes in values, and changes in the state of society and if it is in a state of emergency

Question 4

The Rule of Law was formulated in what document? Why was it put there?

Answer 4

The Rule of Law was formulated in the Magna Carta
This document provided the origin of the rule of law. It set the precedent for all other nations in the British Commonwealth by establishing that no one, not even the monarch, was above the law.
Thus, it was put there to establish that no one, not even the monarch, was above the law.

Question 5

Give the three parts of the rule of law and an example of how each can be broken.

Answer 5

1. Everyone must accept that law is necessary, no one is above the law
   For example - this could be broken if powerful figures such as the monarchs decide they are above the law and do not face the consequences that the rest of us do
2. The law applies equally to everyone
   For example - this could be broken if people with more money decide that they can break the law and get away with it because of how rich they are
3. No one takes our rights away except in accordance with the law (ex. War Measures Act)
   For example - If our democracy was not protected by laws and a dictator decided to take rights away from certain individuals

Question 6

What is the name of the document that sets out our rights and freedoms? When was it ratified and under which PM?

Answer 6

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Ratified in 1982 as a part of the Canada Act Under the PM Pierre Trudeau.

Question 7

The Name of the individuals who have changed the law that we learned in class. What laws did they have an impact on?

Answer 7

1. Delwin Vriend
   He set a precedent that allowed the courts to see that section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms did recognize sexual orientation in “the spirit of the law”
2. Sue Rodrigez - Applied to the Supreme Court of British Columbia to have section 241(b) of the Criminal Code declared constitutionally invalid (Section 241(b) prohibited assisted suicide)
   - This is because it violates sections 7, 12, and 15 of the Charter - Right to one’s body and own life (she was not living a pain-free life and her right to end her life is protected now under the Charter)
   - Supreme Court of Canada eventually allowed medically assisted suicide in February 2015
3. Viola Desmond - Through her persistent advocacy and protests with the help of the Black community, racial segregation was deemed illegal in Canada
   Ripple effect - the small act of challenging the laws that affect where you sit eventually leads to the overturning of many discriminatory laws as a result of recognizing their discrimination
4. Henry Morgentaler - The Supreme Court struck down federal abortion law as unconstitutional in 1988, thereby decriminalizing the procedure
   Because of how he appeared before the Parliamentary Committee on Health and Welfare
5. Sharon Donna McIvor - McIvor took the federal government to court, arguing that section 6 of the Indian Act was discriminatory and infringed on her Charter rights
   Section 6 prevented her from passing Indian status to her descendants in the way men can - her grandchildren could not receive Indian status through her bloodline, if she married a non-white man they would not be considered Indian (but this would apply if she were a man)
   In response to this case, the federal government introduced new legislation (Bill C-3) in 2011 to counter gender discrimination in the Indian Act

Question 8

Why do we create Royal Commissions?

Answer 8

Royal Commissions are boards of inquiry appointed by the government to investigate and report on a particular issue. They will often travel the country holding public meetings, calling witnesses and conducting research. Examples include the 1967 Royal Commission on the Status of Women. We create royal commissions to gather the opinions of the public and investigate significant matters that are of public interest.

Question 9

Give 2 examples of different Lobby Groups in Canada.

Answer 9

Lobby Groups are groups of people that try to sway a legislative in a way that favours their cause. They are private and not government-funded. For example, MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) is a lobby group that allowed for harsher punishments to be put in place for impaired driving. Another example is the World Society for the Protection of Animals Canada - which fought for tighter animal cruelty laws. Lobby Groups are important to Canadian law because they allow for issues that impact citizens to be brought to the attention of the courts and have laws changed as a result.

Question 10

How was our legal system influenced by ancient Rome, England, The Middle East, Asia, Greece etc..?

+ france
+ america

Answer 10

Ancient Rome - gave us lawyers and the need for law school as well as Habeus Corpus and the
12 Tables

England - gave us portions of the Magna Carta, Common Law, the Rule of Law, trial by combat, and oath-taking

The Middle East - gave us…
Hammurabi’s Code and with it the idea of “an eye for an eye”
Restitution (Compensation) - you will be compensated if someone hurts you
Retribution - “An eye for an eye”
Codification - writing down laws for everyone to see

Asia gave us….
Fingerprinting
The Book of Punishment - knowing what will happen to you if you do something wrong as it is written down

Greece gave us… Democracy

Europe (France) gave us…
Napoleonic Code and the idea of property laws

North America gave us…
The Great Binding - Came from five indigenous nations, the Seneca, Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida, and Mohawk in 1450. It states that if we look after the land it will look after us
Aboriginal systems of justice that emphasize community involvement and rehab are enjoying an increasing measure of respect among Canadian lawmakers.

Question 11

What is common law?

Answer 11

Common law is at the bottom of the pyramid - can be overridden by statute and constitutional law. Based on previous decisions made by judges - precedents.

Question 12

What are the 5 legal philosophies we studied in class? Be able to expand on them.

Answer 12

Natural Law (Universal): Some philosophers have argued that the world follows fundamental rules of fairness and justice that are always morally correct. Human beings have the ability to use reason and can recognize these higher laws, and so have a moral duty to follow them, even when the laws written down by our societies say otherwise. There are fundamental principles that are always morally correct (e.g., murder is always wrong)

Legal Positivism (Government-Based): Laws should be followed simply because they are laws. Positivists insist that a law need not be moral to be a law – rather, the law should be followed simply because it is the law. Law gets its authority from the power of government. While laws often reflect important moral values, these values are not necessarily natural or universal

Legal Realism (Judge Based): Courts are the authors of the law. The role of the judge is very important – the traits, dispositions, biases and habits of judges are just as important as precedents and legal principles in forming a decision. Thus the predictability of precedent is an illusion. This explains why two different judges can come to different conclusions with an identical set of facts about a case. What is true, moral and fair depends on the perspective of the individual who is creating the law

Critical Legal Theory (Legal Realism Magnified): This theory argues that since laws reflect individual values, they can contain the biases of powerful social groups. Critical legal scholars argue that while the law appears to offer justice for all, in practice it is a tool most easily used by people who already have a high degree of social power and status. This means that the law can actually maintain social inequality by advancing the interests of powerful groups over the interests of marginalized groups. Laws reflect the biases of powerful social groups. E.g. You need an address to vote - what about the homeless people? This system shuts out voices that need to be heard and continues a cycle of privilege -reflects the biases of powerful social groups

Feminist Jurisprudence (Feminist perspective of law): The state (and the law) is viewed as male and thus treats women the way men see and treat women. Laws have been framed to promote patriarchy – even laws that protect women (sexual assault laws) were originally produced to protect male property.

Question 13

Who were the legal theorists/philosophers we studied in class? Give an example from their theories.

Answer 13

Socrates (Naturalist): Socrates believes to remain good one should follow what is “just” for the concept of laws. Socrates also does NOT believe in “an eye for an eye.” This saying implies that if you do wrong, I then have the right to do you wrong. He thinks that it is NEVER right to do an injustice even if you were the first to suffer. He believes that laws are just, but can be unjustly used. Any law that doesn’t produce justice and harmony should be disobeyed. His views and theories focus on virtue and justice.

Plato (Naturalist): Believed that the state was organized to help citizens live according to Natural law. Thought that laws must be followed because they are a moral guide. His views and theories would focus on knowledge. He believed in God and God created laws. Humans use their reasoning and their education to do good and follow natural laws.

Aristotle (Naturalist): Said that “The rule of law…is preferable to that of any individual freedom” Views similar to Plato when it came to the dangers of democracy and oligarchy but differed as he did not think education alone was the answer to make people “do good”. He felt only law could compel people and thus should train to become part of the government. Also a believer of the natural law that many philosophers agree with.

St. Thomas Aquinas (Naturalist): Law is an eternal natural law that has been revealed through the bible, especially the 10 commandments through God. Laws need to be in accordance with natural law so that people do what’s right. Humans create laws with this in mind to regulate our behaviour and to allow the state to function in the proper fashion.

Thomas Hobbes (Positivist): Hobbes believed that the natural state of Humans was war. The strong and powerful dominate the weak. The law of the Jungle or Anarchy. Hobbes believed that laws should be left to the individual who understands them, a “Philosopher King” This king will understand how to interpret Natural law for the masses, thus creating a Positive law we can follow.

John Locke (Positivist): Believes in individual rights & Freedoms - Private property, Life, and Liberty. Law is simply a tool to preserve law and order and to defend people’s rights. Should a government or leader stop listening to their people/citizens then the people should overthrow that government and replace it.

Jeremy Bentham and John Austin (Positivist): The founder of modern utilitarianism (Bentham), which is an ethical theory that means that your actions are morally right if they tend to promote the most happiness or pleasure over pain to the greatest number of people. Law and morality are separate and all human-made laws can be traced back to human lawmakers. Argued that the laws were rules, like commands

Mary Wollstonecraft (Naturalist): Society keeping women inside as “domestic slaves” was a major detriment as it women back from economic independence. Believed women should be trained in (most of) the same careers as men. Republican for liberty in the sense of not being dependent on or vulnerable to tyrants. Believed some laws were wrong and equality’s importance that women should be treated as equals.

Karl Marx (Positivist): He created “Marxism.” He places importance on the power of economic forces in society rather than the concept of the rule of law. Marxists believe that the material forces (resources) of a society and those that control these forces (the Bourgeoisie/ruling class) will shape the society’s legal system. The rich control the poor. The working class is controlled by the ruling class and they use laws to oppress them.

John Rawls (Positivist): Added a requirement to assume that the choice of social justice principles would be impartial. Called his concept of social justice “Justice as Fairness,” which consists of two principles. The 1st principle means that everyone has the same basic liberties, which can never be taken away. The 2nd principle focused on equality → believed that society could not avoid inequalities among its people. He insisted that a just society should find ways to reduce inequalities in areas where it can act. Positivist because he endorsed a form of a positivistic claim for the separation between the concept of law and substantive moral values.

Question 14

What does judicial independence mean?

Answer 14

Judicial independence is the concept that the judiciary should be independent from the other branches of government. judicial officers of the Court have the freedom to decide each case on its own merits, without interference or influence of any kind from any source, including another branch of government. Judicial independence guarantees that judges will be able to make decisions free of influence and based solely on fact and law. This would hope to diminish any bias.

Question 15

What does Jurisprudence mean?

Answer 15

Jurisprudence is the philosophy or science of law. It is concerned primarily with what the law is and what it ought to be.

Question 16

What does civil disobedience mean, and give an example of it.

Answer 16

Civil Disobedience is where people peacefully refuse to obey a particular law. For example, Gandhi is one of the most renowned practitioners of civil disobedience in modern history. He employed nonviolent resistance as a means to challenge British colonial rule in India. One of Gandhi’s most famous acts of civil disobedience was the Salt March in 1930. In response to the British monopoly on salt production and the imposition of a salt tax, Gandhi led a 240-mile march to the Arabian Sea coast to produce salt from seawater, in defiance of British law.

Question 17

What are the main differences between a Primary and Secondary source of law? Give an example of both.

Answer 17

A primary source of law is derived from religion, morality, history, customs, conventions, and social/political philosophy. An example from history could include how Canada incorporates parts of Indigenous law such as the “The Great Binding Law” of the Iroquois Confederacy. While Secondary sources of law include constitutional law, statute law, and common law. For example, Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms would be an example of constitutional law. In summary, primary sources originate from various sources like religion and history, while secondary sources include established legal frameworks such as constitutional law and statutes.

Question 18

Case Law/Common Law:

Answer 18

information “common to all” relying on case law → made by judges.

Question 19

Customs:

Answer 19

A legal custom is the established pattern of behaviour that can be objectively verified within a particular social setting.

Question 20

Precedent:

Answer 20

i.e. what came before – applying a previous decision to a similar case. Precedent and common law prevent judicial bias from influencing the laws that are already set → they need to follow what is set.

Question 21

Statute Law:

Answer 21

Statute law is based on government officials’ decisions that may reflect the citizen’s opinions. Statue law can also override common law. Government reps make statute law - more control as citizens because we elect government officials into power.

Question 22

Conventions:

Answer 22

Conventions are unwritten rules but accepted ways.

Question 23

Ultra Vires:

Answer 23

Ultra vires mean outside the power of a government, like how provincial governments can’t enact gun laws or how the federal government can’t control a province’s education system.

Question 24

Intra Vires:

Answer 24

Intra vires means inside the power of a government like how the federal government can control matters with Indigenous people and how the provincial government can control their police forces.

Question 25

Legal Scholarship:

Answer 25

Producing scholarly issues and books on a particular topic. Feminists have used this tactic to publish feminist perspectives on a wide variety of issues. Examples include – feminist writings on Battered Women’s Syndrome which were fundamental in having this condition accepted as an exculpating factor in self-defence trials

Question 26

Legal Positivism:

Answer 26

Laws should be followed simply because they are laws. Positivists insist that a law need not be moral to be a law – rather, the law should be followed simply because it is the law. Law gets its authority from the power of government. While laws often reflect important moral values, these values are not necessarily natural or universal.

Question 27

Entrenched:

Answer 27

Has constitutional status, can’t be changed easily needs an amending formula to change it. Well protected from being changed.

Question 28

Ad Hoc Lobby Group:

Answer 28

“Ad Hoc” meaning at the time. Certain lobby groups - if something happens they respond with an “Ad Hoc” group that is not permanent.

Question 29

Royal Commission:

Answer 29

A board of inquiry appointed by the government to investigate and report on a particular issue. Will often travel the country holding public meetings, calling witnesses and conducting research. Government may act on recommendations but it does not have to. Examples include the 1967 Royal Commission on the Status of Women.

Question 30

Patriate:

Answer 30

(To bring something back) to return or turn over full legislative powers, as of amendment, to (a constitution) that were formerly held by the government of another country: a term used in Canada to describe the action of taking over the power to amend the constitution from the British parliament in 1982.

Question 31

Stare Decisis:

Answer 31

Stare Decisis means to stand by the decision as in precedents made by past judges and use those precedents as Common law.

Question 32

Plaintiff:

Answer 32

A person who brings a case against another in a court of law. (ComPLAINer). Important to Canadian law because we have them.

Question 33

Utilitarianism:

Answer 33

An ethical theory that means that your actions are morally right if they tend to promote the most happiness or pleasure over pain to the greatest number of people.

Question 34

Marxism:

Answer 34

Marxists believe that the material forces (resources) of a society and those that control these forces (the Bourgeoisie/ruling class) will shape the society’s legal system.The rich control the poor. The working class is controlled by the ruling class and they use laws to oppress them

Question 35

Feminist Jurisprudence:

Answer 35

The state (and the law) is viewed as male and thus treats women the way men see and treat women. Laws have been framed to promote patriarchy – even laws that protect women (sexual assault laws) were originally produced to protect male property.

Question 36

Legal Realism:

Answer 36

Courts are the authors of the law. The role of the judge is very important – the traits, dispositions, biases and habits of judges are just as important as precedents and legal principles in forming a decision. Thus the predictability of precedent is an illusion. This explains why two different judges can come to different conclusions with an identical set of facts about a case. What is true, moral and fair depends on the perspective of the individual who is creating the law.

Question 37

Battered Women’s Syndrome:

Answer 37

When women in abusive relationships react by killing their spouses. The effects of prolonged spousal abuse were used to advance the justification of self-defence. Battered Women’s Syndrome is not, strictly speaking, a defence in itself but rather an explanation of an abused woman’s state of mind that can be used to help advance the justification of self-defence.

Question 38

Critical Legal Theory:

Answer 38

This theory argues that since laws reflect individual values, they can contain the biases of powerful social groups. Critical legal scholars argue that while the law appears to offer justice for all, in practice it is a tool most easily used by people who already have a high degree of social power and status. This means that the law can actually maintain social inequality by advancing the interests of powerful groups over the interests of marginalized groups. Laws reflect the biases of powerful social groups E.g. You need an address to vote - what about the homeless people? This system shuts out voices that need to be heard and continues a cycle of privilege -reflecting the biases of powerful social groups.

Question 39

Explain how constitutional law developed in Canada.

Answer 39

British North America Act, 1867
Made Canada a nation, independent of Britain
Passed in Britain; B. kept power to pass laws

Statute of Westminster, 1931
Allowed Canada to pass own laws, conduct foreign affairs
Still could not amend BNA

Constitution Act, 1982
BNA Act transferred to Canada, renamed
Added Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Amending formula: could change with agreement of 7 provinces equally at least 50% of population

Question 40

What is the BNA Act?

Answer 40

British North America Act, 1867
Made Canada a nation, independent of Britain
Passed in Britain; B. kept power to pass laws
Explained how Canada’s government was going to be set up
Different from the British - A really strong Federal government and very strong provincial governments
There had to be jurisdictions set up - the feds couldn’t do everything
Creation sections 91 and 92 - gave the provinces and the federal government jurisdiction over certain things

Question 41

Give some examples (3 for each) of the division of power between the Federal and Provincial Governments.

Answer 41

Federal
RCMP
Canada Post
Banking
Indigenous Affairs
Criminal Law
Marriage and Divorce
Military

Provincies
Civil Law
Education
Health Care
Roads
Hospitals
Money from the feds but under the provincial government

Question 42

What level of government passes bylaws?

Answer 42

Municipal government
Parking, parking at certain times
Dog licenses

Question 43

What is the highest court in Canada?

Answer 43

The Supreme Court of Canada
Only hears appeals - can’t start a case here

Question 44

Why was the Statute of Westminster important?

Answer 44

Allowed Canada to pass their own laws and conduct foreign affairs
In 1931 it got put through, allowing us to actually create our own laws and deal with our own international affairs
We became much more independent
We still can’t amend our own constitution under this statute at this point

Question 45

What Prime Minister was in charge during the constitutional debates?

Answer 45

Pierre Elliot Trudeau ends up wanting to bring the charter back to Canada and get us full legal freedom - the ability to amend our own constitution
Entrenches the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to it

Question 46

What Prime Minister brought in the “The Charter of Rights and Freedoms”?

Answer 46

Pierre Elliot Trudeau

Question 47

Give 2 limitations of the Bill of Rights.

Answer 47

This only applies to federal laws - not provincial ones
You could change it - any legislator sitting could change it any time, not very strong
But was the precursor to our charter

Question 48

What does Section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms give us?

Answer 48

These are called our “Fundamental Freedoms”
Freedom of Religion (2a)
Freedom of Thought and Expression (2b)
Freedom of Peaceful Assembly (2c)
Freedom of Association (2d)

Question 49

Why is section 15 of the CRF so important?

Answer 49

Equality Rights - allow us to not be discriminated against for many things
Ie. Age, gender, religion, sex, sexual orientation, etc

Question 50

Why was section 33 the “Notwithstanding Clause” put into the Charter?

Answer 50

Overrides Section 2, 7-15, of the charter
Was put in so that the provinces would agree to sign off on the charter despite the power it would give to the Supreme Courts
Quebec uses it the most (Bill 21)

Question 51

What year was the Charter put into the Constitution?

Answer 51

1982

Question 52

How has the Supreme Court expanded its power since 1982?

Answer 52

It’s now given rights over parliament when it comes to changing laws
Problem: there is less power to the people, decisions made by the government
Judicial Biases

Question 53

Why is discrimination different from stereotyping?

Answer 53

Discrimination is the action involved
Stereotyping is a thought
Ig. A pizza place doesn’t hire men as servers - discrimination based on gender
They can think guys are stupid but cannot put it into action

Question 54

What are mobility rights?

Answer 54

Section 6
Ability to move around and leave the country being that the other country wants you there
If you have a criminal record you may not be able to move around

Question 55

What has the international community done about the Human Rights abuses faced by the Rohingya and the Uyghurs?

Answer 55

Uyghurs -
United Nations member countries have called on Beijing to end its systematic human rights abuses towards the Uyghurs
In a landmark ruling in 2022, the UN’s committee on racial discrimination strongly condemned China’s persecution of Uyghurs and referred the case to the UN Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect.
Rohingya -
Canada officially recognized the treatment of the Rohingya people as a genocide
Canada pledged 1 million dollars for relief support
Other countries such as the USA and parts of Europe have also acknowledged it as genocide
Many countries including Australia, Austria, Afghanistan, Belgium etc, expressed support for the Rohingya people and offered humanitarian aid
China, however, expressed support for Myanmar instead

Question 56

What was the Indian Act?

Answer 56

The first act that was created by the federal government regarding how to control or oversee the Indigenous people of Canada
Includes the residential school system, management of Indigenous lands, and reservations, put them under federal jurisdiction - Indian Agents overseeing what going on, etc
Control on every facet of their life

Question 57

Why did First Nations leaders oppose the “White Papers?

Answer 57

Pierre Elliot Trudeau tried to change the Indian Act because of how detrimental it was to Indigenous people
In doing so, they removed Indian status and took away the little protection Indigenous people were given in the Indian Act
This is why the White Papers never went through but demonstrates that progress was tried to be made, just poorly done

Question 58

Under which level of government will you find First Nations issues being dealt with?

Answer 58

The Federal government

Question 59

What is judicial activism and why is it a controversial issue in Canada?

Answer 59

Judicial Activism - the idea that judges have their own biases and can bring them into court
This is a problem because the judges have so much power in Canada due to The Charter of Rights and Freedoms gave them this power

Question 60

Give an example of human rights theories from the Theorists we studied in class.

Answer 60

John Locke: Life, Liberty & Private Property
JJ Reassou: Social Contract (between the people and their government )
Kant: Moral Law
Harriet Taylor Mill: Equality in all rights
Karl Marx: Marxism

Question 61

Land Claims:

Answer 61

Formal demands made by Aboriginal peoples for ownership and control of lands on which they live or have traditionally lived

Question 62

Entrenchment:

Answer 62

To protect and guarantee a right or freedom by ensuring that it can only be changed by an amendment to the Constitution.

Question 63

Cultural Genocide (Indigenous groups):

Answer 63

Genocide is killing people, in cultural genocide you are going after the culture specifically (ie. Indian Act).

Question 64

Strike Down:

Answer 64

If the Court feels that a law violates the Charter it has two options: Strike Down – the law is no longer valid or Read Down – the law may generally be acceptable but not in this case it must be changed to comply with the Charter. Allows the government to strike down a law that is no longer valid.

Question 65

Collective Rights:

Answer 65

rights acquired as a result of membership in a group; all members of the group share the same rights

Question 66

TRC:

Answer 66

The TRC was created due to the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, which was one of the largest settlement packages for survivors of residential schools. TRC lets Residential School survivors share their personal experiences. The government of Canada provided $72 million to support TRC and 6 years of travelling to all parts of Canada, hearing from over 6,500 witnesses. Created a historical record of the residential school system. Its mandate was to inform Canadians about what happened in residential schools.

Question 67

Social Contract:

Answer 67

The Social Contract is that the government attains its right to exist and to govern by “the consent of the governed. Rousseau’s social contract theory says people give up some freedom to a group in return for the safety and protection of their basic rights. In human rights law, it means governments must respect people’s rights and freedoms, with the people’s agreement. It stresses equality, freedom, and the people’s common wishes as key to a fair society under this agreement.

Question 68

Discrimination:

Answer 68

The actual action of making a distinction between people and treating them differently on a basis other than individual merit.

Question 69

Freedom:

Answer 69

The right to conduct one’s affairs without governmental interference.

Question 70

Right:

Answer 70

A legal, moral, or social entitlement that citizens can expect, mainly from the government.

Question 71

Moral Law:

Answer 71

Kant maintained that each of us has a worth or a dignity that must be respected. This dignity makes it wrong for others to abuse us or to use us against our will. Kant expressed this idea in a moral principle: “Humanity must always be treated as an end, not merely as a means.”Thus, people’s human rights should be upheld not because of what they can offer society, but simply because it is moral to do so.

Question 72

Prejudice:

Answer 72

A preconceived opinion based on a stereotype or inadequate information.

Question 73

Stereotype:

Answer 73

An oversimplified, standardized, or fixed judgment of a group of people.

Question 74

Marxism:

Answer 74

Human rights promote the interests of the ruling, high classes in society (the property-owning individuals in the capitalist system). Our rights such as freedom of speech and property rights are created to maintain our existing unjust social order. The nature of the rights is selfish and gives certain individuals authority to ensure that the actions of others do not conflict with their own interests. Karl Marx believed that human rights were not solutions to achieving equality and justice. Marx’s solution to equality was abolishing the class system.

Question 75

Notwithstanding Clause:

Answer 75

s. 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which allows federal and provincial governments to pass legislation that is exempt from s. 2 and ss. 7 to 15 of the charter.

Question 76

The White Papers:

Answer 76

Pierre Elliot Trudeau and his Indian Affairs Minister tried to fix the Indian Act with this
Take away the Indian Law and create a new law. This law was created in order to achieve equality (NOT equity - which was bad) for all Canadians by eliminating “Indian” as a legal status. Strived to make everyone to same - Indigenous lose their Indian status and become one with society. This was bad because when Indigenous peoples go out into society without their Indian Status, they would lose the controls and resources (social safety) from the Indian Act →they would be left with poverty and poor education with their lack of education from before. Created for equality among all Canadian First Nations by giving them their rights back that the Indian Act took away, but was eventually rejected.

Question 77

Reasonable Limits:

Answer 77

The idea that all rights and freedoms are not absolute and have limitations in a free and democratic society. For example, although you have the Right to Free Speech, you cannot spew hate speech.

Question 78

Indian Act:

Answer 78

a number of colonial laws whose purpose was to terminate First Nation culture and further push euro-Canadian society.

Question 79

Amending Formula:

Answer 79

a method for making changes to a constitution in Canada’s case, a method that would no longer involve the British parliament

Question 80

Federalism:

Answer 80

Canada’s form of political organization in which the federal government governs the country as a whole, while the provinces and territories have specific, limited powers.

Question 81

What does Mens Rea mean?

Answer 81

Mens Rea is “the guilty mind” deliberate intention to commit a wrongful act, with reckless disregard for the consequences, which means the intent of the crime, the mental capacity to do it, and the thought behind it.

Question 82

What does Actus Reus mean?

Answer 82

Actus Reus is “the guilty act” - the voluntary action, omission, or state of being that is forbidden by the Criminal Code, which means the act itself.

Question 83

Why do you need both elements to charge someone with 1st-degree murder?

Answer 83

You need both elements (men’s rea & actus reus) to charge someone with 1st-degree murder in order to see how much planning was actually involved to constitute 1st-degree, as it shows a well-planned men’s rea and you succeed with the action.

Question 84

What is the most basic reason for having criminal law?

Answer 84

For the Protection of the Public.

Question 85

The criminal code is overseen by which level of government?

Answer 85

The Federal government.

Question 86

What is the difference between Strict and Absolute liability offences? Give an example.

Answer 86

Absolute liability involves lower forms of crimes where you are simply charged and not given jail time (speeding ticket - the cop does not care why you are speeding, no men’s rea) and there’s no defence to it because you simply committed the act while strict liability involves bigger crimes (murder) where you can face jail time and there’s the defence of due diligence. For example, when a company polluted the duck’s habitat so they had to make the ducks stop going there but no matter what they did to make the ducks go away, they kept coming back.

Question 87

Give an example of 3 “Parties” to a crime.

Answer 87

Principle Actor: A person who actually commits a crime – that is commits the actus reus and has the men’s rea. Leader of the operation, if it was a murder ro a robbery this person would be carrying the gun.

Aider and Abettor: A person who helps and encourages the principal actor to carry out a crime. They are not in charge but if it was a robbery they would help the person getaway as the getaway driver.

Counsellor: A person who counsels or recommends that a person commit an office. Ie. The Cheerleader’s mom case.

Accessory After the Fact - A person who helps the principle actor and the aider and abettors after the crime has been committed, but were not present during the actual crime. Ie. If this was a robbery they would let them use their house to hide from the cops.

Question 88

What is conspiracy?

Answer 88

Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to carry out an illegal act, even if that act, does not actually occur. Basically, when you decide that you’re going to plan with someone else to commit a crime and this crime gets laid on with other charges.

Question 89

What is the highest court in Canada? Do they hear anything but appeals?

Answer 89

The Supreme Court does not hear anything other than appeals - you can appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Question 90

The burden of proof in any criminal legal case is always on which side?

Answer 90

The Crown - the prosecution, because of Habeus Corpus. It is not the defense’s job to prove that the accused is innocent, that is already assumed, so the burden of proof is the idea that it is the Crown’s responsibility to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty.

Question 91

Why does the court allow for cross-examination?

Answer 91

In order to test the validity and show the accuracy of the evidence testified by the witness on the other side. The lawyer from their side cannot do this as it would not be accurate, you go easy on you’re witness and then drill the other sides witness to point out holes in their story and put doubt in the judge’s mind.

Question 92

What is Hearsay?

Answer 92

When you repeat something in court that you heard from someone else that you didn’t actually witness. It cannot be used as actual evidence. An attorney may ask a witness only about what the witness saw or experienced firsthand, not about something he or she heard from a third party. If a witness said “Ann told me that she saw Tom stab Al with a knife” the opposing lawyer could object to hearsay evidence which is not admissible in court.

Question 93

What is the difference between Forensic and Physical evidence?

Answer 93

Physical evidence is any object, impression or body element that can be used to prove or disprove facts relating to an offence.
Forensic evidence is the use of biochemical and other scientific techniques to analyze evidence in a criminal investigation.
Thus, physical evidence is tangible such as a knife at the scene but forensic evidence is the analysis such as autopsies that show a murder victim’s time of death.

Question 94

When can the police arrest you without a warrant?

Answer 94

The police can arrest you without a warrant if:
if you have committed, are about to commit or are in the process of committing an indictable offence
if s/he needs to preserve the evidence
if s/he needs to prevent you from committing another offence

Question 95

What is a citizen’s arrest?

Answer 95

A citizen’s arrest is an arrest without a warrant by any person other than a peace officer. Private citizens have the power of arrest if:
- if you have committed, or are in the process of committing an indictable offence
- if you are escaping from the police
you are taking their taking property
- If a private citizen arrests you, they must turn you over to the police ASAP and use reasonable force or risk being charged with assault.

Question 96

What are the 3 levels of offences and how do they differ from one another?

Answer 96

Summary:
A crime that is considered less serious and carries a lighter penalty Ie. speeding ticket
Fined up to $2000 and/or imprisonment for up to 6 months
Tried in provincial court
No jury

Indictable
A crime that is more serious than a summary conviction offence and carries a heavier penalty Ie. Murder, arson, assault, etc
2 years to life imprisonment
depending on the offence could be tried in Provincial or Superior Court
Jury/No jury

Hybrid
an offence that the Crown can try either as a summary or indictable offence
always treated as indictable until charges are laid in court, then the court must decide how to treat the offence
Provincial or Superior Court
Jury/No Jury
Starts as an Indictable but may get kicked down to a summary depending on mitigating factors (if they have a criminal record, etc) and the avalibility of the courts

Question 97

What does non-culpable homicide mean? Give 2 examples where it may apply.

Answer 97

Non-culpable homicide is a killing for which a person cannot be held legally responsible. Basically, you’ve killed someone but you’re not found guilty of it.
It applies when:
You’re a soldier in times of war
You’re self-defending

Question 98

What is the difference between 1st and 2nd-degree murder?

Answer 98

The amount of planning and Mens Rea involved.

Question 99

Why is trafficking drugs a worse offence than possession?

Answer 99

Trafficking drugs is a worse offence than possession because you are harming the public by distributing the drugs to others.

Question 100

What is the rule you need to remember if you are going to use self-defence as a defence?

Answer 100

You may only use the reasonable force necessary to defend against the attack otherwise you will be charged will assault because we do not have Castle laws in Canada.

Question 101

What are the goals of sentencing? Deterrence, retribution etc..

Answer 101

Punishment - To show that there are consequences, Society condemns your actions

Deterrence - To stop others from committing crimes and to prevent offenders from reoffending (recidivism)

Retribution - To award those who were wronged

Protection of the Public - Main concern, Protection of people, property, individual rights and public morals

Question 102

What are some of the sentences that can be issued by a judge? Closed custody etc..

Answer 102

Closed custody = penitentiary or jail
Open Custody = bush camp, farm camp, community residence
Intermittent Sentences = fewer than 90 days, can be served on week-ends
Statutory Release – release after serving 2/3 of your sentence

Question 103

What does Recidivism mean?

Answer 103

The rate of an offender re-offending and returning to a life of crime after serving jail time.

Question 104

What is the difference between Aggravating and Mitigating factors in a crime?

Answer 104

Mitigating factors in a crime can lessen the charges such as if the accused doesn’t have a criminal record.

Aggravating factors can increase the charges and the severity of the crime, such as if a person murdered someone and then mutilated the body.

Question 105

What is Plea Bargaining?

Answer 105

Plea Bargaining is when you plea out and form an agreement with the court to plead guilty, get a lesser charge, and then not have to attend an expensive trial.

Question 106

What is the difference between a concurrent and consecutive sentence?

Answer 106

Consecutive sentences are sentences back to back while concurrent sentences are ones served together and often, for life. In Canada we do not really use concurrent sentences, the USA does.

Question 107

What is Restorative Justice? How does it differ from the traditional Canadian Court System?

Answer 107

Restorative justice (also know as alternative justice): differs from traditional approaches because it focuses on using joint problem-solving to deal with the harmful effects of crime.

Question 108

Florida v William Kennedy Smith

Answer 108

Summary
The Palm Beach rape case against William Kennedy Smith has shifted from media scrutiny to legal proceedings.
Lead prosecutor Moira Lasch seeks to introduce evidence of Smith’s past similar assaults, invoking the controversial Williams Rule in Florida.
Judge Mary Lupo must balance Smith’s fair trial rights with the prosecution’s use of the Williams Rule, allowing evidence of prior similar acts.
Smith faces accusations of sexual battery on a Florida woman at the Kennedy family estate, with Lasch’s office seeking testimony from three other women alleging past assaults.
The Williams Rule, dating back to 1959, permits evidence of prior acts as circumstantial proof, akin to a federal rule of evidence.
Defence attorneys are barred by the judge from disclosing the victimss past drug use and sexual history, while prosecutors emphasize her credibility and emotional distress.
“That she is an unwed mother who has had three abortions, that she has used cocaine, and that she once belonged to a Palm Beach social set known for wild parties and heavy drug use.”

Significance to Class Concepts
Evidence: The bad character and prior bad acts of the accused are not allowed UNLESS they show a pattern of behaviour (Raping three other women before)
Rape Shield Laws:
Sections 276 and 277 of the Criminal Code prevent defence attorneys from placing a rape victim’s previous sexual history in evidence during a rape trial
Section 276 – barring all sexual history except with the accused was struck down as unconstitutional and now there is an in-camera hearing to determine the relevancy of the victim’s previous sexual history
Section 273.2 disallowed belief of consent as a defence in rape cases – “no means no” provision – the defendant must make all reasonable attempts to have ensured consent

Question 109

R. v Hornick

Answer 109

Summary
P Hornick and Rachel Aitcheson faced liquor charges related to their organization of a women’s bathhouse event in September 2000 although the women did put their name son a special event permit for the night.
5 Male police officers, responding to a criminal complaint, infiltrated the event, even though 2 undercover female agents were already present and investigating.
The men went inside to see naked women - they counted how many topless women there were
Judge Peter Hryn dismissed all charges, citing officers’ breach of constitutional rights and likening their behaviour to “visual rape.”
Hryn emphasized the women’s right to a safe space for sexual exploration, free from male intrusion.
The defence argued that male officers’ presence infringed upon the privacy of hosts and guests.
The case revealed that male officers had planned to enter the bathhouse, indicating a desire to see naked women.
Outcome: The verdict sparked discussions on police conduct and privacy rights, leading to complaints against the police and calls for an apology. The police commissioner briefly apologized just because they had to The LGBTQ+ community did not accept it because it wasn’t meaningful as it was not supported by any change in the way the police treat gay communities.
In 2005, a class-action lawsuit and complaint to the Ontario Human Rights Commission resulted in a $350,000 settlement, part of which covered legal fees and part of which was donated to charities of the complainants’ choice.

Significance to Class Concepts
Police Search Powers under the Charter: Police conduct and thus search powers are governed by the charter and being that the officers raided the bathhouse with the intention of seeing naked women as there were already 2 female officers present and undercover in a female safe space, they mostly violated their section 2 and section 8 rights by invading the bathhouse.
Section 2b) - Freedom of Expression - The lesbian women exploring their sexuality could not express themselves because men were there in a female safe space.
Section 8: Search and Seizure - no search warrant, no reason for five male cops to be there.
Other Charter Sections:
Section 1: Limits - The police officer’s gross misconduct went beyond reasonable limits as set out by the charter in a free and democratic society.
Section 2: Freedom of Expression - The lesbian women exploring their sexuality could not express themselves because men were there in a female safe space.
Section 7: Safety and Security - By intruding on a female safe space, these men endangered the safety and security of the women.
Section 8: Search and Seizure - no search warrant, no reason for five male cops to be there
Section 12: No cruel or unusual punishment - being looked at by men could be arguably cruel and unusual punishment.
Section 15: Equality Rights - Not being treated equally due to their sexual orientation
Overall Breach of Privacy: “Though the male officers did not see Aitcheson and Hornick unclothed, their lawyer Frank Addario said that, as hosts of the event, their privacy rights were violated because male officers did see their naked and partly naked guests” + “I find in this case there was a reasonable expectation of privacy vis a vis men in general and male police officers,” said Hryn “I find the search, in this case, was analogous to a strip search…. If patrons were taken to a police station, they would have been searched by other female officers.”
Detainment: When the detective was stopping the host of the event at her door and preventing her from running the bathhouse event he was detaining and entraping her as she was not arrested at that point.

Question 110

R. v Moore

Answer 110

Summary
Douglas Donald Moore, a serial pedophile, was given parole in June 1997 after completing a 16-month sex offender treatment program.
The parole board deemed Moore rehabilitated, citing his understanding of his crimes, sobriety, acknowledgment of his sexuality, and claimed disinterest in sex with children.
Moore subsequently hanged himself in April 2004 at Maplehurst Correctional Complex after then being charged with sexually assaulting three boys in a foster home and becoming a suspect in the slaying of three young men.
Despite Moore’s release, the parole board had previously deemed him highly likely to re-offend due to his extensive criminal history, including sexual assaults on multiple boys in Ontario and British Columbia.
Moore underwent treatment at the Regional Treatment Centre in Kingston Penitentiary, focusing on therapy and relapse prevention.
He was initially denied release during treatment but later impressed the parole board with his progress.
The case prompted calls for legislative changes regarding public notification of sex offenders’ presence in communities and retroactive inclusion in the sex offender registry.
Debate surrounds the effectiveness of sex offender treatment, with some experts skeptical of its efficacy, citing the manipulative nature of psychopathic offenders like Moore.

Significance to Class Concepts:
The Effectiveness of Alternative Sentencing:
I do not think that Douglas Donald Moore should have received parole because Moore was already repeating his actions - in 1986 he sexually assaulted 4 boys (sentencing him to probation), then in 1989 he was sentenced to 4 years for attacking a 12-year-old, then he was released in 1991, violated his probation and raped a 14-year Toronto-area boy, this earned him 4 more years, and then in 1995 he was sent to a treatment centre until 1997 when he was released and then sexually attacked three more boys.
While I’m sure that Moore was able to lie his way into appearing to have improved at the treatment centre, this is not someone who should have even been at a treatment centre, he should have been incarcerated for a long time.
Clearly, if prior to the treatment centre he had already committed three separate acts of sexual assault, sexual attack, and rape, he was not going to improve.
I do not understand why Moore consistently received such light punishments - he was only put on probation, he was only sentenced for 4 years which became 8, and then he was sent to a treatment centre which eventually granted him parole.
In my opinion, he shouldn’t have just been denied parole but he should have been incarcerated at a penitentiary and the public should have been better protected.
However, in different cases, I do believe alternative sentences are viable and useful, I just think that in a case where we saw repeated behaviour even prior to the treatment centre, Moore should have been treated as the threat that he was and is to society because ultimately the courts failed to protect the public in this case.
Alternative sentences should only be placed when a certain behaviour has not occurred more than once, otherwise, they do not recognize the clear character of an individual who is going to struggle to change.

Question 111

R. v Brown

Answer 111

Summary
Decovan Brown, a young black man, was driving an expensive car on an urban highway on November 1, 1999.
He was stopped by police for driving slightly above the speed limit in an area known for common speeding practices.
Brown was subjected to a roadside screening test and arrested under s. 253 of the Criminal Code for driving with excessive blood-alcohol levels.
At trial, Brown’s lawyer argued that his rights under s. 9 of the Charter, freedom from arbitrary detention, were violated due to racial profiling.
Brown claimed he was stopped not because of his driving but due to racial stereotypes about young black men driving expensive cars.
The defence presented evidence challenging the credibility of the arresting officer, supported by reliable independent evidence and Brown’s testimony.
Throughout the trial, the judge frequently intervened, displaying a favourable bias towards the arresting officer and skepticism towards Brown’s claims.
The trial judge’s remarks during cross-examination and sentencing suggested bias and an inclination to dismiss Brown’s allegations of racial profiling.
Despite the defence’s arguments, Brown was convicted.
Brown appealed his conviction to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, where Justice Trafford overturned the conviction due to a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the trial judge.
Justice Trafford emphasized the difficulty in proving racism directly, highlighting the importance of impartiality and sensitivity to allegations of racial profiling.
The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld Justice Trafford’s decision, acknowledging evidence supporting racial profiling and dismissing the Crown’s appeal.

Significance to Class Concepts
Racial Profiling: R. v. Brown illustrates racial profiling, where individuals are targeted based on race rather than behaviour. Brown’s arrest while driving an expensive car reflects a systemic racial bias in law enforcement.
Judicial Bias: The trial judge’s actions, including skepticism towards Brown’s claims and urging Brown to apologize to the officer, demonstrate judicial bias. This bias influenced the trial’s fairness and contributed to Brown’s conviction being overturned on appeal, highlighting the importance of impartiality in judicial proceedings.

Question 112

R v Bernardo

Answer 112

Summary
“Scarborough rapist” - disappeared at one point, then teen girls started disappearing down in St. Catharines, Toronto in the late 1990s
Later they find out through good police work, DNA, etc that a couple is doing this - a duo of Serial killers, take his DNA, connect him back to the Scarborough raping, but he moved - they sexually assaulted and killed a younger sister and two young girls
The wife was asked to testify against the husband, and she did, said she was a victim of domestic abuse - and told the cops that she had nothing to do with this, but she wanted a plea bargain, got a 10-year sentence and she took it immediately
It comes to light that everything was videotaped after she had gone through the court system, showing that she was participating in what was going on - Bernado said he did the raping but she did the killing
But now it’s a situation of double jeopardy, she cannot be tried again even though she was super involved
This got huge press - good-looking white people in a couple male and female that are serial killers are rare - leading to a publication ban because it might sully the jury pool

Significance to Class Concepts
The Idea of an Impartial Jury & Publication Bans:
Judges will often impose a publication ban to prevent the jury from having access to information not presented in front of the jury
The Criminal Code provides a ban on any publication in any newspaper or broadcast with respect to any portion of the trial at which the jury is not present.
In the Bernardo case, this was particularly difficult for two reasons:
The American media refused to follow the ban – and most Canadians have ready access to American news
Most jurors had already had access to a great deal of information before the trial

Question 113

What is State Sovereignty?

Answer 113

The legal authority and responsibility of an independent state to govern and regulate its political affairs without interference from other nations (but you can work together), except when there is a major issue, such as war. Ability to govern your own state and control over it and your people.

Question 114

Give three examples of how International Law differs from Domestic Law?

Answer 114

ree examples of how International Law differs from Domestic Law?
1. The main difference between international law and domestic law is enforcement. Domestic law is enforced while international law isn’t.
2. The judicial system is very different.
3. The government structure is different → UN has a general assembly, but there’s no structured government.

Question 115

Why does Canada not extradite accused people to countries who believe in Capital Punishment?

Answer 115

Canada will not extradite accused people to countries who use the death penalty and will try to get citizens back to do their sentencing here from countries who use the death penalty because it is not a part of our legal system (or domestic law), so we want the assurance that it will not be applied to our citizens who are in different countries.

Question 116

What is customary Law?

Answer 116

A common pattern in law that has emerged over time to become binding in international law.
Ex. cannon shot rule → we do not use cannons anymore, but there is still a specific distance in water that gives a country governance over the water. It used to be “a cannon shot.”

Question 117

Why do we have treaties? What purpose do they serve?

Answer 117

We have treaties to regulate legal relations with individual nations and they serve the purpose of helping us solve international disputes. Basically, treaties are in many ways similar to the contracts that regulate legal relations within individual nations. If you break them, there is no consequence, but other countries will not want to join treaties with you

Question 118

What is the difference between Diplomatic Asylum and Diplomatic Immunity?

Answer 118

Diplomatic Immunity - Given to a diplomat automatically when they step into another country (there are not many diplomats). When they commit a crime, diplomats can not go to jail (they can feel safe to do their job without being charged for like running a red light). Without this, the country will use them for leverage.

Diplomatic Asylum - Any citizen can use it in another country. If you break the law, but if you feel you haven’t been treated fairly you can go to a Canadian consulate and seek asylum. Therefore, the country can not take you away if the Canadian consulate believes you. Ie. You’re visiting Russia and they invade Ukraine, and Canada gets upset, all Canadians in Russia will go and seek asylum. It is an area where you can not be captured in that country

Difference - One is for diplomats, and the other is for all Canadians. Diplomats get it immediately and we have to ask.

Question 119

Why do countries need diplomats?

Answer 119

Diplomats are the group that organizes international law and regulates foreign affairs, they help diffuse high-stakes situations in negotiations between 2 nations. Diplomats are like the “lifeblood” of the international system, if we did not have diplomats in different countries the international system would fall apart. Our leaders cannot do all the negotiations between countries surrounding international affairs, diplomats are the ones who represent us at an international level.

Question 120

What is a Consulate?

Answer 120

A smaller building that functions similarly to an embassy (diplomats live there), it provides administrative services for residents living or visiting another country. They can be found anywhere in major cities. A consulate is seen as a foreign piece of land (the Canadian consulate is seen as a legal piece of Canadian soil even in Australia or another country).

Question 121

Why was the League of Nations created?

Answer 121

After the horror of World War One, the nations realized that the old system of alliances and diplomacy would no longer prevent war. Thus in 1919 (after WW1), the League of Nations was formed to “promote international co-operation and to achieve peace and security.”

Question 122

What are the problems with the League of Nations?

Answer 122

1. It did not achieve the aim of universal membership: USSR, USA and Germany did not become members (Germany was not allowed to join and they were one of the causes of WW1).
   Keeping these countries out made them more angry and want to retaliate
   Within 20 years, we had another world war due to this and it was done by Germany.
2. It had no real power – the compromises made during the establishment of the League resulted in voluntary (not enforced) rather than mandatory compliance with obligations and sanctions
   It was a get-together in thought, rather than in practice
   Several actions in the 1930s proved the ineffectiveness of the League – Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia, Japan’s of China, and Germany’s of Austria/Czech/Poland

Question 123

What are the six parts to the United Nations Systems?

Answer 123

1. General Assembly
2. Security Council
3. The Secretariat
4. International Court of Justice
5. The Economic and Social Council
6. The Trusteeship Council - doesn’t do anything anymore though

Question 124

What is the fundamental problem with the United Nations?

Answer 124

There is nothing they can enforce legally.

Question 125

What is a sanction?

Answer 125

A measure/covenant that is applied against other nations that pose a threat to international peace and security, in order to pressure them to stop or change their dangerous actions. Ex. act of restricting trade, a punishment or action that is imposed, by hurting nations economically. Usually does not work with bigger countries like Russia.

Question 126

What does the ICJ (international court of justice) do?

Answer 126

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the main judicial organ of the United Nations. It is composed of 15 judges each elected to a nine-year term of office by the UN General Assembly and the Security Council. Members of the ICJ do not represent their governments but are independent lawmakers and judges intended to reflect the principal legal systems of the world. It has 2 main functions:
1. It settles legal disputes submitted to it by the states that have agreed to its jurisdiction, and need a mediator. The ICJ then gives advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by international organs and agencies.
2. They settle disputes that go against the United Nations itself.
They are different from the ICC: International Criminal Court. Which Deals with international crimes, such as terrorism, war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, etc.

Question 127

Who can bring cases to the ICJ?

Answer 127

Any country in the UN - it must be a state, not an individual.

Question 128

Who are the permanent members who make up the UN Security Council?

Answer 128

US, Russia, China, France, UK (they are also the founding members - victors of WW2)

Question 129

What does UNCLOS stand for?

Answer 129

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
UNCLOS is an international treaty that sets out a legal framework for ocean activities. It defines the maritime zones along a country’s coastline and the rights and duties of a country regarding these zones.
A 12-mile limit was universally accepted as the limit of the territorial sea. UNCLOS also permits the establishment of an additional 12-mile continuous zone (adjacent to the territorial sea limit.)
UNCLOS also recognizes that coastal states have sovereign rights over the natural resources of the seabed and subsoil of the continental shelf, as well as jurisdiction over certain activities such as marine scientific research.
UNCLOS also created the (EEZ) which extends up to 200 miles (370km) from the shores of the coastal states.

Question 130

Explain the Cannon-Shot Rule.

Answer 130

How much ocean a country can control outside their coastal line. Can be seen as your economic zone (EEZ). Anything that has to do with fishing, resources within your EEZ. The area outside your EEZ is an international open-water.

Question 131

Who owns the moon?

Answer 131

NO ONE OWNS THE MOON.
The law of outer space is in its beginning stages, and existing legal norms have yet to be tested.
The Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and other Celestial Bodies was drawn up in 1967 in order to resolve issues. The agreement states that the moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind, neither the surface nor subsurface of the moon, nor any natural resources shall become the property of any state or government.
Only 10 states ratified the Moon Agreement (1984). For now, it is essentially dead. Another 5 states have signed but not ratified the agreement. - China, Russia, USA - never signed.

Question 132

Why can no one country take Antarctica over and call it theirs?

Answer 132

Because of the Antarctic Treaty (1959) and how it’s stated that it is used by the world. You can ONLY use it for scientific purposes, but no villages or anyone can live there.

Question 133

What does “Genocide” mean?

Answer 133

Genocide means the purposeful killing off the a certain group of individuals, the physical act of killing THEM, not their culture specifically, but the people in a certain group.

Question 134

Why was NATO created?

Answer 134

After WW2, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) was created. It was created to stop the spread of communism and protect Western Europe (Canada & USA was apart of it, Russia was and then they were kicked out). It is called upon when armies are needed in major international issues, such as war or conflicts ie. Afganistan.

Question 135

Give an example of 3 methods of “Conflict Prevention and Resolution”.

Answer 135

1. Weapons of Mass Destruction
   Military weapons that have the potential to kill large numbers of people and that cannot distinguish between soldiers and civilians
   The most active current focus of international arms control is on weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems
   The question of nuclear weapons and their limitation has been on the international agenda since the formation of the UN and the dropping of atomic bombs by the US on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 (for example).
2. Arms Control Initiatives
   Various arms control initiatives were proposed in the years following WW2 but little was achieved until the 1968 adoption of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), a landmark instrument designed to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology
   5 nuclear weapon states identified by the NPT are China, France, Russia, UK and the US - These countries were allowed to keep their nuclear weapons but with a commitment to proceed toward nuclear disarmament
   The 183 non nuclear weapon states that are a part of the NPT have pledged not to develop or acquire nuclear weapons
3. Nuclear Free Zones
   Anti proliferation initiative in establishment by treaty of nuclear weapons free zones
   Such zones are in Latin America, the Carribbean, the South Pacific, Southeast Asia, Africa, and Antarctica
   The Antarctic Treaty is the most comprehensive, prohibiting any measures of a military nature

Question 136

Why do we need the “Geneva Convention”?

Answer 136

It outlines how we are supposed to treat our prisoners of war and civilians during war. Keeps a level of humility to prevent killing off masses of people during war.

Question 137

Why is there no true international definition for terrorism?

Answer 137

Because then the whole world would be help up against the definition of terrorism, Russia and the USA could not properly withhold the definition and would end up committing terrorism under it. Ie. Invade Iraq. Thus, there is no definition so they cannot get into trouble and can remain blissfully ignorant.

Question 138

What is a Non-Proliferation strategy?

Answer 138

A treaty to stop the spread of the use of Nuclear Weapons. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) is the centrepiece of global efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of nuclear disarmament.

Question 139

Give examples of two groups of people that we studied in class that have had their Human rights violated according to international law.

Answer 139

Canada - Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women:
Situation: 34 ongoing cases involving the death or disappearance of Indigenous women in Canada, which authorities claim are not due to foul play.
Discrepancies: Families of the women dispute police findings, suggesting potential murder. Evidence of suspicious circumstances and unexplained injuries call for further investigation.
UN Involvement: The UN Human Rights Office has urged the Canadian government to investigate the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG). They concluded the violence constitutes genocide, highlighting systematic human rights violations and abuses.
Government Response: Canada emphasizes reconciliation with Indigenous peoples but avoids the genocide label, referring to the issue as “serious human rights issues” or “cultural genocide.”

USA - Guantanamo Bay:
Situation: The prison in Cuba, established by George Bush to detain suspected terrorists, is known for torture and brutal treatment. Only 8% of detainees are charged with terrorism.
Human Rights Violations: Illegal and indefinite detention, torture, inhumane conditions, unfair trials, sleep deprivation, force-feeding, and waterboarding.
UN Involvement: The UN has condemned the lack of medical assistance and torture rehabilitation resources, calling for the facility’s closure.
Government Response: The US denies wrongdoing, fearing detainees might reveal abuses if released.

Question 140

Customary law:

Answer 140

A common pattern that has emerged over time to become binding in international law.

Question 141

Genocide:

Answer 141

The deliberate and systematic killing of a whole ethnic or racial group.

Question 142

Reparations:

Answer 142

Formal economic compensation, often from one sovereign state to another, for harm done in the course of armed conflict.

Question 143

Extradition:

Answer 143

The act of returning a person to a jurisdiction in which he or she is charged with a crime for trial in that jurisdiction.

Question 144

General Assembly:

Answer 144

The General Assembly is the main body of the United Nations where each member state is represented and has one vote. Often described as the “town hall meeting of the world,” it uses a one-nation, one-vote system to examine, debate, and promote global consensus on various issues. The General Assembly can adopt resolutions, which are not legally binding but reflect shared global governmental opinions. Despite the lack of binding power, it is the most significant norm-generating institution in the international legal system.

Question 145

Sanctions:

Answer 145

Penalties or actions imposed as a means of influencing behaviour.

Question 146

Secretariat:

Answer 146

The Secretariat performs the UN’s day-to-day work, administering its programs and policies. It acts as the UN’s civil service and is led by the Secretary-General, who is appointed by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council for a renewable five-year term. The Secretariat’s responsibilities include managing peacekeeping operations, mediating international disputes, conducting surveys on economic and social issues, and preparing studies on human rights and sustainable development.

Question 147

Veto:

Answer 147

A power to reject something, usually a law or political measure.

Question 148

Non-appropriation:

Answer 148

The doctrine that no state may subject any part (of the high seas) to its sovereignty.

Question 149

Internal waters:

Answer 149

Bays, rivers, harbours, and lakes over which a state has (or claims) complete sovereignty.

Question 150

Innocent passage:

Answer 150

A doctrine that allows international navigation of territorial seas on the condition that no fishing or illegal activities occur.

Question 151

Give an example of some of the first National Parks in Canada.

Answer 151

One of the first National Parks in Canada was the Banff National Park.

Question 152

What is a public nuisance?

Answer 152

A public nuisance is an interference with a public right, such as the right to fish or the right of navigation.

Question 153

What is a Riparian Right?

Answer 153

The right of an owner of land bordering on a lake, river, or stream to sue another person who interferes with the quantity or quality of the water.

Question 154

When was the EPA first introduced?

Answer 154

The Environmental Protection Act was first introduced in 1971.

Question 155

What is the Paris Agreement?

Answer 155

The Paris Agreement’s central aim is to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Question 156

How will entering into an International Climate Agreement help fight climate change?

Answer 156

Entering an international climate agreement helps fight climate change by:
Global Cooperation: Countries work together to reduce emissions.
Setting Targets: Nations commit to and update emission reduction goals.
Accountability: Mechanisms ensure countries follow through on commitments.
Financial Support: Developed nations help fund climate action in developing countries.

Question 157

Injunction:

Answer 157

A court order to prevent or stop someone from doing something; it may be a temporary order, effective until trial when it may or may not be made permanent.

Question 158

Negligence:

Answer 158

An act committed without intention to cause harm, but which a reasonable person would anticipate might cause harm.

Question 159

Private nuisance:

Answer 159

An indirect interference with the use and enjoyment of land due to the actions or conduct of someone nearby.

Question 160

Public nuisance:

Answer 160

An interference with a public right, such as the right to fish or the right to navigation.

Question 161

Trespass:

Answer 161

The direct interference with land that is owned or occupied by another person.

Question 162

EPA:

Answer 162

The Ontario Protection Act’s stated purpose is to “provide for the protection and conservation of the environment.” Its focus is rather narrow though, it regulates the actual and potential sources of contaminants.

Question 163

What is the ESA?

Answer 163

A labour code legislation that imposes the minimum standards for the treatment of employees. This applies to all contracts of employment where work is performed in Ontario.

Question 164

Why was the ESA put into place?

Answer 164

To even out the negotiating power imbalance between employers and employees by establishing minimum standards for a number of contract issues.

Question 165

Why do we have Worker’s Compensation?

Answer 165

To compensate people who have been hurt or become sick because of conditions at the work site (or also because of their dependants or supervisors.)

Question 166

How does the Human Rights Code apply to the workplace?

Answer 166

Guaranteed under the charter, in a provincial context, the Ontario Human Rights Code applies to prohibit discrimination in the workplace. Ie. on the basis of - race, citizenship, sex, sexual orientation, age, etc.

Question 167

What is the “Gender Gap”?

Answer 167

Women on average still earn less money than men do, even when they work in the same industry.

Question 168

Why do workers dislike “Scabs” so much?

Answer 168

Scab: A derogatory term used to describe a worker hired as a temporary replacement during a strike or lock-out.

Disliked because… they are a major irritant in the bargaining process.

Employers may feel that, if the plant can be kept running and they continue to earn profits, they can put further pressure on the union to settle, as the striking workers receive only strike pay from their union.

Question 169

What is working to rule?

Answer 169

A form of work slowdown in which employees apply the workplace rule literally, with the intention of making the workplace less efficient.
Refuse to perform informal functions (that they normally do) - ie. working overtime

Question 170

What is the impact that technology has had on certain sectors of the workforce?

Answer 170

Job Replacement: Traditional jobs replaced by personal computers, telecommunications, and robotics.
Productivity Increase: Companies using new technologies are more productive and efficient.
Sector Impact: Technology affects both manufacturing and service sectors (e.g., clerical workers, bank tellers).
New Jobs: Emergence of tech-related jobs (e.g., web design, computer programming) in the knowledge sector.
Work Hours: Employees are working longer hours and facing more stress.

Question 171

Inalienable:

Answer 171

Cannot be surrendered or transferred.

Question 172

Wildcat strike:

Answer 172

A wildcat strike is a strike action undertaken by unionized workers without union leadership’s authorization, support, or approval; this is sometimes termed an unofficial industrial action. This can happen when a workplace incident such as the firing of a popular union activist triggers an angry reaction and a wildcat strike.

Question 173

Trade Union:

Answer 173

A group of workers who form an organization to bargain collectively with employers to improve working conditions, benefits, and wages.

Question 174

Rand Formula:

Answer 174

The requirement that, in a bargaining unit in which the majority vote to join a union, all members must pay union dues whether or not they join the union.

Question 175

Binding Arbitration:

Answer 175

A process in which a neutral third party, the arbitrator, hears from union and management representatives and makes a final decision that both sides must accept.

Question 176

Collective Bargaining:

Answer 176

A process in which individual workers in a union negotiate a contract between the union and the employer covering their wages, hours of work, and working conditions.

Question 177

Scab:

Answer 177

A derogatory term used to describe a worker hired as a temporary replacement during a strike or lock-out.