Public Law

In the above case the apostrophize was being asked to finalize on the constitutionally saved conformity in effect(p)s of the Mi kmaq Indians in Nova Scotia with regard to their right to discernment and sell execute . avocation the purpose devoted in this instance several(prenominal) different ancient groups on the East and West obligate filled equivalent rights . The accord at the centre of the materialization had been signed in Halifax Nova Scotia in 1760 . At the time of the signing of the accord France and Britain were at war with each other and this accord represented a impertinent trammel between Britain and the Mi kmaq . As the Mi kmaq could no wideer depend on the ease with France the new accord had the make fored gather of imparting the Mi kmaq to be able-bodied to dear new sources of necessit ies such as blankets , gunpowder and piquancy . Britain had the fortune of securing peace with a previously hostile foeman . The alliance between Britain and Nova Scotia benefited Britain in the war against France . The run brought by Donald marshal relied upon the championship clause that had been inserted in the treaty which statedAnd I do further engage that we will non traffick , barter or Exchange whatever Commodities in any manner slake with such persons or the managers of such Truck houses as shall be ap chiefed or Established by His Majesty s regulator at Lunenbourg or Elsewhere in Nova Scotia or AccadiaThe top off notion re thinked the treaty and reached the opinion that it was the intention of the British that the Mi kmaq should be allowed to unfold their playing , seek and gathering lifestyle to vitiate them from becoming a burden on the everyday treasury . This was to be achieved by the creation of a series of truckhouses where the Mi kmaq could fi nd their goods to make out . The truckhouse! s would operate at a detriment merely Britain was prepargond to tolerate certain losings in their trade with the Mi kmaq for the purpose of securing and maintaining their friendship and reject their approaching trade with the French The treaty did not specifically destine a right to hunt and fish but the evaluate was prep bed to imply this into the agreement . If Britain had proceedd to take a firm stand on the Mi kmaq only profession with them there would take away got been no dispute over their continued right to hunt and fish . As Britain had stopped insisting on the pocket trade between them it was open to debate as to whether the concur conditions should be allowed to remain in force . Some of the influence in this case were of the opinion that as the Mi kmaq had be dementedered the benefit of the treaty because they were allowed to trade freely . The majority termination went in favour of the Mi kmaq . With arbiter Mclachlin concluding that the Mi kmaq tre aty right to fish and trade survived the discontinuance of the soap trading arrangement with the BritishThe ratiocination issueively meant that Marshall was entitled to continue hunting and fishing and that the Minister of Fisheries was infringing s35 of the constitution Act if they mark to stop the aboriginals from continuing their trade in this manner . The wooroom did timber that regulations could be enacted to limit their treaty rights so longsighted as the criteria for recognising aboriginal rights in a manner which could be justified by the test in R v Sparrow was kayoedlined . The test was discussed in 1996 in the condition of an aboriginal fishery as in the case of R v Gladstone . In this case the Supreme coquet of Canada appreciate the aboriginal right of a member of the Heiltsuk mint to catch and sell herring roe on kelp . The tribunal in this case invokeed that the presidential term could steer such concomitantors as the inquisition of regional and ec onomic fairness and the recognition on the historic r! eliance upon the fishery by non-aboriginal groupsA month aft(prenominal) the origin earreach the Supreme court of justice of Canada dismissed an covering for a rehearing of the case . In coming to their decision they splendid the reasoning behind their original decision . The motor order made the point that the rights of the treaty did not belong to an private but belonged to the local community as a consentient . The court was in like manner quick to point out that their preliminary decision only established a right chthonian the treaty in respect of fishing , hunting and traditional convention activities such as wild berries and fruit . The court stated that any ex inclineed seeing of the term gathering so as to include enter and minerals would cook to be heard separately from this issue The court as well pointed out that the harvesting would be limited to the field of force traditionally utilise by the communityThe discrepancies highlighted by the two deci sions atomic number 18 very stripped . The bet on decision seeks to add clarity to the first decision but as the added criteria of contract down the areas that they accepted would be covered by the treaty . In the original decision the court did not specifically state which areas of the treaty were back up . The decision was given in such a shady manner which could lay down led the aboriginals to hear the term gathering to include enter and collecting fruit and wild berries . The second decision elegant this point and laid down the leading that the aborigines would boast to bring a separate action if they cute the court to consider whether such activities as this could be include at crumb the ambit of the treatyIf I had been asked to decide n such amours I think I would have come uped the view of the mental interrogatory judge , and Madame Justice McLachlin , who were the nonage opinion in the first decision . It was their opinion that the removal of the restric tion by Britain in respect of limiting trade between ! Britain and Nova Scotia should also have the effect of relieving the aborigines of their right to rely on the treaty in respect of their rights to fish and hunt . The reason for my decision in this stylus is that the aim of the treaty when it was first initialised was to limit the trade between Nova Scotia and Britain . In return for the promise by the aborigines not to trade with anyone else their rights to hunting etc were protect by the treaty . By allowing the aborigines to trade with other countries as well as having their rights protected seems to be giving a double advantage to the aborigines that the in the first place treaty did not intendJudicial activism has been be in uprightness as the practice in the practice in the judicatory of defend or expanding individual rights through decisions that get from established top executive or are self-governing of or in emulation to supposed constitutional or legislative intent (Merriam-Webster s dictionary of Law , 199 6 . It has also been defined as a ism of juridic decision-making whereby settle allow their personal views about public policy , among other factors , to guide their decisions , usu . with the suggestion that adherents of this philosophy tend to find constitutional violations and are willing to treat precedent (B .A Garner , 1999 . Those who are in favour of juridic activism defend this on the grounds that some(prenominal) polices are vaguely worded , so the courts are forced to interpret them in ways which break through activist . By contrast discriminative restraint is were the decide interpret the equity narrowly and allow the legislative and executive branches to formulate presidential term policyIn the case above the majority view was taken by the activist element of the workbench who allowed a wider translation of the treaty then(prenominal) was originally mean . The effect of this was to make the treaty binding on Britain despite the fact that Britain were no all-night enforcing limitations on trade between the! aborigines and Britain . If the judiciary had been operating under legal restraint then the interpretation would have been that the treaty ceased to be binding once the restrictions on trading were bring up by BritainThose opposed to juridic activism claim that it usurps the power of the legislative assembly and diminishes the rule of police and democracy . They feel that an unelected judicial branch has no legitimate grounds to vacate policies that have been made by duly elected candidates . The opposers of activism also rely that democracy or the rule of law cannot cost when the law is what a judge says it should be . They feel that judges should be limited in their interpretation of the law and should try to follow the letter of the law as closely as possibleThose in favour of activism put forward the view that judicial activism exemplifies judicial review and that the courts must strike down any principle that violates the constitution , They feel that it is the duty of the courts to protect minority rights and instigate the law and this can best be achieved by a flexible approach to the interpretation of the rules .

Proponents of activism feel that the judiciary should relent itself an expanded role and that there should be an gain in the powers which is not subject to an electorateIn Canada judges have the power to interpret the law handed down by the legislature . They also have the power to resolve disputes and to use usual law . Canada s legal system is derived from the British system of common law . The structure of the Canadian courts relies heavily on the finesse of t he judges , policy and common law . In this way judic! ial activism is much more obvious and apparent within the Canadian legal systemIt has been stated by the Supreme Court Justice of Canada stated thatthe charge of judicial activism may be mute as saying that judges are act a particular policy-making agenda , that they are allowing their political views to hold in the outcome of cases before them . It is a serious matter to suggest that any branch of government is deliberately playacting in a manner that is inconsistent with its constitutional roleMuch reproval has been aimed at the judiciary in Canada specifically in likeness to rulings that have favoured the extension of the rights of gay people . In his carry HYPERLINK hypertext deportation communications communications protocol / web .amazon .com /gp / harvest-home \o hypertext channelize protocol / entanglement .amazon .com /gp /product Against Judicial Activism : The extraction of immunity And Democracy in Canada , Leishmann highlights the redefining of marriage t o include alike charge up couples as an egregious example of judicial activism (R , Leishmann , 2006 . In his discussion he also examines many cases including the accomplish Roderiguez case of the `right to die by assisted felo-de-se , the Surrey Borough Council case which allowed accession to gay-positive literature for pre-school and school aged children and Scott Brockie and Chris Kempling cases which elevated the issue of independence of religion against homosexual rights . He argues that it is breakneck to allow the judiciary to have such power and that the Government should grow a backbone and stop this from happeningA recent judgment which declared the bulwark of private healthcare insurance as unconstitutional was judged by may to be a noticeable example of judicial activismThe conclusion that can be careworn from the above is that the festering of judicial activism could be dangerous as the judiciary are being allowed to gain greater powers then was ever inte nded for them to haveBibliographyHYPERLINK hypertext ! transfer protocol /en .wikipedia .org /w / power .php ?title pack_B ._Kelly action frame \o James B . Kelly James B . Kelly , July 30 , 2006 . HYPERLINK hypertext transfer protocol /network .amazon .com /gp /product \o hypertext transfer protocol / entanglement .amazon .com /gp /product Governing With the take up : Legislative And Judicial Activism And Framer s Intent (Law and Society Series ( HYPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /w / indicator .php ?title UBC_ iron action ignore \o UBC invoke UBC Press PublishersHYPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /w /index .php ?title Rory_Leishman action burn \o Rory Leishman Rory Leishman , whitethorn 2006 . HYPERLINK http /www .amazon .com /gp /product \o http /www .amazon .com /gp /product Against Judicial Activism : The Decline of license And Democracy in Canada ( HYPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /wiki /McGill-Queen 27s_University_Press \o McGill-Queen s University Press McGill-Queen s University Press PublishersH YPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Kermit_Roosevelt_ tierce \o Kermit Roosevelt III Kermit Roosevelt , October 15 , 2006 . HYPERLINK http /www .amazon .com /gp /product \o http /www .amazon .com /gp /product The Myth of Judicial Activism : make mavin of Supreme Court Decisions ( HYPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Yale_University_Press \o Yale University Press Yale University Press Publishers , 272ppHYPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /w /index .php ?title mugful_Sutherland action abbreviate \o Mark Sutherland Mark Sutherland , 2005 . Judicial Tyranny : The clean Kings of AmericaHYPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Phyllis_Schlafly \o Phyllis Schlafly Phyllis Schlafly , 2004 . The Supremacists : The Tyranny Of Judges And How To Stop ItHYPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /w /index .php ?title Stephen_P ._Powers action edit \o Stephen. Powers Stephen. Powers and HYPERLINK http /en .wikipedia .org /w /index .php ?title Stanley_Rothman action edit \o Stanley Rothman Stanley Rothman , 2002 . The Le! ast Dangerous Branch ? Consequences of Judicial Activism (Praeger backshttp /www .lawsonlundell .cahttp /www .lss .bc .cahttp /www .pch .gc .cahttp /www .scc-csc .gc .ca /aboutcourt /judges /speeches /DemocraticRoles_e .a sp ...If you want to assure a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper