A Commentary on Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (Attorney General)
AbstractThis paper analyzes the Supreme Court of Canada's decision to uphold as constitutional s. 43 of the Canadian Criminal Code relating to the defense of corporal punishment of a child (Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (Attorney General)). The author argues that the majority in Canadian Foundation placed undue reliance upon perceived Canadian public opinion leading the Court to fail to uphold children's Canadian Charter (1982) right to equal benefit of the law. The Court's approach in Canadian Foundation is suggested to have, in effect, redefined a constitutional issue as a mere policy matter. This in turn allowed the Court to defer to social consensus and alleged governmental discretionary power in retaining the s. 43 defense. |