Your search

This chapter focuses on the relationship between freedom of expression and democracy from both a historical and a theoretical perspective. The term ‘freedom of expression’ includes free speech, freedom of the press, the right to petition government, and freedom of political association. Eighteenth-century proponents of popular government had long offered democratic justifications for freedom of expression. The chapter then demonstrates that freedom of political expression is a necessary component of democracy. It describes two core functions of such expression: an informing and a legitimating one. Finally, the chapter examines the concept of ‘democracy’, noting various ways in which democracies vary among themselves, as well as the implications of those variations for freedom of expression. Even before democratic forms of government took root in the modern world.

This chapter addresses the salience of the Rawlsian idea of public reason for freedom of speech. It applies a philosophical template of Public Reason to a typically legal issue: what motivations for speech restrictions render the restriction legitimate under the Public Reason criterion, and what motivations taint the law as illegitimate, because they are non-endorsable by reasonable persons to whom they apply. Traces of this pattern of argument can be found in several legal systems: in the United States, Germany, New Zealand, and Australia, when they grapple with constitutionality of restrictions on freedom of speech, and choose the motive path (rather than the effects path) of scrutiny. The most typical pattern of argument is the one which disfavours content-oriented restrictions, as compared to content-neutral restrictions. This distinction offers attractive avenues of argument when it is viewed in the context of legislative motives, and how they fare under a general principle of Public Reason. The chapter then establishes that viewpoint restrictions and subject-matter restrictions—two subcategories of a broader genus of content-based restrictions of freedom of speech—correspond to two perceived wrongful motivations in regulating speech: intolerance and paternalism.

"This book provides an extensive account of the origins and evolution of the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR), and offers a comprehensive examination and appraisal of the rule. The book's 28 chapters encompass a wide variety of perspectives on the GAAR; contributors include tax practitioners, academics from around the world, and government officials from the Canada Revenue Agency and the Department of Justice, as well as the former Supreme Court of Canada justice who wrote the reasons for judgment in the leading GAAR case. The book, unique in the thoroughness of its approach and the diversity of its points of view, is intended as the go-to source for government officials, tax professionals, academics, and judges--a reference book covering all aspects of the GAAR: its historical background, its major structural features and shortcomings, the evolution of the case law dealing with the GAAR, and the interpretive issues that continue to cause uncertainty."-- Provided by publisher.

This chapter explores customary refugee law. Refugee law is primarily treaty law. However, many of the major refugee-receiving countries are not parties to either the Refugee Convention or the Refugee Protocol, for example Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Iran, Jordan, and Lebanon. Hence, customary international refugee law can be critically important in the identification of key principles of refugee protection and as an indication of what is permitted or not. While customary international law may not play as significant a role in refugee law as it does in other areas of international law, there are at least three practices of refugee protection aimed at safeguarding access and admission to refugee protection for which varying degrees of agreement exist in favour of a rule (or emerging rule) of customary law: non-refoulement, temporary refuge, and the right to be granted (to receive) asylum. These practices are deeply intertwined in their humanitarian purpose.

"Legislated impact assessment requirements were first introduced over fifty years ago with the National Environmental Policy Act in the United States and have since spread to over a hundred and fifty jurisdictions around the world. The details have varied widely, reflecting the global diversity of socio-ecological and governance systems and associated issues, traditions, capacities, ambitions, and power structures. In 2015, Canada embarked on a task that no other country has attempted in recent years: fundamentally reconsidering how best to tackle environmental assessment. This review and revision process ended with the passage of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA) in 2019. The Next Generation of Impact Assessment explores the evolution of the Canadian assessment process and evaluates the effectiveness of the IAA."-- Provided by publisher.

"Legislated impact assessment requirements were first introduced over fifty years ago with the National Environmental Policy Act in the United States and have since spread to over a hundred and fifty jurisdictions around the world. The details have varied widely, reflecting the global diversity of socio-ecological and governance systems and associated issues, traditions, capacities, ambitions, and power structures. In 2015, Canada embarked on a task that no other country has attempted in recent years: fundamentally reconsidering how best to tackle environmental assessment. This review and revision process ended with the passage of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA) in 2019. The Next Generation of Impact Assessment explores the evolution of the Canadian assessment process and evaluates the effectiveness of the IAA."-- Provided by publisher.

The Federal Court of Appeal and Federal Court are unique among Canada's courts because they are itinerant -- they hear cases in all parts of Canada -- as well as being bilingual and bijural. This book was prepared for the celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Federal Courts in 2021. Seventy-eight current and retired judges and prothonotaries on the two courts were interviewed and are referred to throughout the book. The authors present a brief history of these courts and their predecessor -- the Exchequer Court of Canada -- and an overview of the courts' jurisdiction, decision-making trends, and unique attributes. There are chapters on each of the courts' specialties -- administrative law, immigration and refugee law, intellectual property, security and intelligence, Indigenous issues, the environment, admiralty, labour and human rights, and tax. Chief Justice Noël and Chief Justice Crampton each contribute a chapter. The preface is by Justice Frank Iacobucci and the epilogue by Justice Robert Décary.

The Federal Court of Appeal and Federal Court are unique among Canada's courts because they are itinerant -- they hear cases in all parts of Canada -- as well as being bilingual and bijural. This book was prepared for the celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Federal Courts in 2021. Seventy-eight current and retired judges and prothonotaries on the two courts were interviewed and are referred to throughout the book. The authors present a brief history of these courts and their predecessor -- the Exchequer Court of Canada -- and an overview of the courts' jurisdiction, decision-making trends, and unique attributes. There are chapters on each of the courts' specialties -- administrative law, immigration and refugee law, intellectual property, security and intelligence, Indigenous issues, the environment, admiralty, labour and human rights, and tax. Chief Justice Noël and Chief Justice Crampton each contribute a chapter. The preface is by Justice Frank Iacobucci and the epilogue by Justice Robert Décary.