Contents
Introduction
The Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms has been criticized by many as its public rights section has
stipulated some regulations regarding the rights of the individual that might
have affected the policing system and public safety of the citizens. Now after
more than two decades of implementation of the charter we can safely analyse its
effect on the policing system and the public safety of the citizens of Canada. The
police initially put forth a valid debate against the public rights charter as
it had the potential to affect the policing system and promotion of public
safety negatively. However, in light of the situation regarding policing and
public safety in Canada disproves the fact as the charter’s influence on public
safety has not had any detrimental effect on the policing system in such a
magnitude to cause worry (Morse, 2003). This factor has been supported throughout
the essay by pointing out the various facets of the charter and its effect on
the policing system and the public safety.
The thesis that is supported throughout the essay is the factor of the lack
of negative impact of the charter on public safety and the policing system has
been emphasised and supported by different parts of the charter.
The
charter and its analysis
The
following analysis is based on the word and spirit of the charter and the
interpretation of its meaning that in no way acts as an impediment to the
policing o promotion of public safety. The different facets of the charter have
been discussed along with supporting arguments in favour of the thesis in the
following points.
The criminal justice system
The
charter stipulates that the criminal justice system should be fair and
impartial but it should be used as a last resort in the cases where the
judicial system might have some impact on the civil rights and liberties of the
individual. This statement is supportive of the fact that the criminal justice
system is in no way impeded by the charter of public rights. It also stipulates
that the punishment that is deemed appropriate must not be overly harsh and
fitting for the crime after the context and specific circumstances of the case
has been taken into consideration (Bayefsky and Eberts, 1985). This should be
and is usually part of the other justice systems so it cannot be deemed as an
impediment of the justice system. Therefore, the criminal justice system is
free of any negative influence of the charter of liberties.
Search and seizure
All
people have their private spaces and information that they choose to share with
some people and exclude others. The policing system’s rights to invade these
private spaces and making them public knowledge is blow to the human dignity
and overall composure of the person involved. Therefore, the rights of the
person to keep some information secret cannot be denied as it is ethically part
of the civilised society. The rights of search and seizure of the personal
belonging and the right to invade private space has been limited by the charter
and even before that a warrant was required for the police to invade the
privacy of the people. The charter is justified in their limiting of the rights
of search and seizure but it cannot be called an impediment as it is preserving
the rights of the people to preserve their dignity. If there is ample cause to
search and seize some items that are illegal there can always be a warrant
which is approved by the judiciary (Daly, 2006). The limiting of the right of
the police to invade the privacy of an individual and his right to preserve his
human dignity is an essential part of civilised behaviour and not an impediment
as the warrant system is available for the cases where the invasion of privacy
is absolutely necessary for public safety.
Record checks by the police
The
record checks have been an essential part of employment screening but the
charter stipulates that they are unnecessary unless the employee’s
responsibility includes handling of sensitive information or resources (Greene,
1989). It can be justified by saying that tone single act on indiscretion cannot
define the character of a person and the police record checks for the
professions that are not sensitive are an unnecessary violation of privacy.
Therefore, the support of the charter only makes the opinion of the people more
prominent. The necessity of the record checks has been judged to be
inconsequential to the employment of an individual and thus making it
unnecessary in terms of employment and the validation o the police record
search for such trivial matters is expenditure the government can do without.
Therefore, this step can also be justified by logic and common sense (Manfredi
and Kelly, 2009).
The use of force and rights of the police
The
police are civil servants who are afforded by a certain amount of power over
the common folk. The common folk interact with the police daily as suspects,
witnesses, victims and simple as members of public so the course of interaction
are defined by the rights that are due to the public and the police. The police
have the right to use force to gain compliance from members of the public so
their rights and reasons behind the actions should be scrutinised thoroughly
(Morse, 2003). This is another fact that is supported by the charter and it is
deemed necessary in many circumstances. The charter only limits the rights of
the police as their actions without ample provocation and definite sign of
guilt can lead to violation of public rights easily. So, the stipulations
regarding the rights of the policing system and especially the use of force to
force compliance from the convicted of witness or even victim can be seen as a
necessary action to retain the spirit of the democracy where the thousands of Canadians
are concerned. Therefore, the charters intervention in the limiting of rights
of the police to use force can be seen as a necessary measure to preserve the
spirit of democracy. The police can never be given absolute right so the
impediment created by the charter is a justified measure and cannot be disputed
by logic.
Pre-trial detention
The
number of the people in Canada who are in sentenced custody remained steady
throughout the years as the charter came into effect but the number of
pre-trial detention rates increased drastically which touched the breaking
point in 2005. In 2005 and the years since the number of people in the
pre-trial detention were greater than the people in sentenced custody. So this
proves the fact that the policing system has not been hindered by the charter
as they still have imprisoned innocents unfairly just because of suspicion. In fact,
the statistically proven figure of the percentage of innocents in the pre-trial
detention number at 55% which means more than half the people detained is
innocents. Therefore, the police cannot say that their operations of dispensing
justice have been impeded by the charter as they still continue to violate the
rights of innocents without proof and consideration of their rights (Canadian
Civil Liberties Association, 2016). In support of the argument it can be said
that the crime rate on Canada has steadily decreased over the last two decades
so the statement that the civil rights charter might hinder the police is
unfounded.
Incarceration and rights of the prisoners
The
incarceration of the people who are convicted is justified but the prison
system of Canada never did discriminate between the convicted and the people
waiting bail decisions or in pre-trial custody which cannot be condoned by any
civilised person. The prison is an opaque institution that has a very high
amount of control over all aspects of the lives of the prisoners. Consequently,
the civil rights in the prisons and violations of the same cannot be stopped
without intervention of the government and the charter is the first step in
that direction (Rolla, 2007). Although the charter is
fairly ineffective in this regard the attempt to give voice to the concern
where the public rights might be violated has been successful and the stricter
scrutiny of the prison system and the lives of the prisoners has resulted from
the effort. This might not be called impediment as the complete control over
all aspects of the lives of other person are ethically wrong and the off chance
that the person might be innocent makes it doubly so (Sharpe and Roach, 2005).
Conclusion
It
can be easily seen from the argument that the charter has not taken any action
to impede the justice system and especially the policing and public safety. It
only gives the people rights to question the rights of the policing system and
their intervention in personal matters in the name of public safety. Thus, it
can be concluded that the charter on civil rights does not affect the policing
system negatively not does it endanger public safety. It checks the rights of
the policing system but it prevents misuse of power and interpretation of law
so it is totally justified in its application.
No comments:
Post a Comment