The Rule of Law: The Role of Judicial Review in Promoting Human Rights and Social Reform

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the expanded scope of judicial review after the introduction of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 and the subsequent power of courts to strike down legislation that violates constitutional rights. Subsequent interpretations of the Charter have transformed such rights into litigation tools and sources of empowerment capable of mobilizing forces for social change. Through an analysis of major cases and rulings, the paper will argue that the adoption of the Charter and the constraints existent upon popularly controlled institutions have established judicial systems as the primary guarantors of citizen and minority rights and the active instigators ofsocial reform in Canadian civil society. Each of the chosen cases bears monumental political and legal significance. R. v. Oakes created a proportionality test used to assess and potentially remove state legislation infringing on Charter‐protected liberties; R. v. Morgentaler decriminalized abortion and represented a definitive judicial foray into a contentious ethical and political debate; Vriend v. Alberta removed the last bastion of sanctioned discrimination against homosexuals, providing a foundation for The Same Sex Marriage Reference and finally Halpern v. Canada rendered Ontario the first jurisdiction in North America to recognize same‐sex marriage. The paper will also address the limited capacities of legislative bodies to meet demands for reform, leaving them to assume chiefly reactive roles. Finally, it will examine and evaluate criticism levied at the judicial review process, with particular attention paid toaccusations of anti‐majority and undemocratic tendencies.