The Charter and expansive versions of the federal and
provincial human rights codes were supposed to safeguard the human rights
and fundamental freedoms of Canadians. Rory Leishman argues that this
experiment in radical constitutional reform has failed because judicial
activists and human rights adjudicators have read their ideological
preferences into the law rather than upholding the law as originally
understood.
Against Judicial Activism cites numerous cases to support this argument.
For instance, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal and Supreme Court
read a ban on discrimination on the ground of transsexualism as being part
of the province's human rights code. On the basis of this revision of the
law, the tribunal ordered the Vancouver Rape Relief Society to pay $7,500
to a transsexual man in compensation for refusing to admit him into a
training course for rape crisis counsellors.
Leishman argues that the proclivity of judges and adjudicators to change
the law from the bench compromises the rule of law, constricts the
historic rights and freedoms of Canadians, violates the separation of
powers under the Constitution, and subverts the democratic process.
Rory Leishman is a former lecturer, political science,
University of Western Ontario, the national affairs columnist for The
London Free Press, and a frequent contributor to newspapers and magazines
across Canada. He lives in Canada.
From
the Critics
"This is a grand book in the best tradition of 'a citizen speaks
out.' Charterphile or charter-sceptic, you must take note." Janet
Ajzenstat, political science, McMaster University, author of The Once and
Future Canadian Democracy.
"Leishman does an admirable job of bringing an
issue that has agitated the academic and legal profession for many years
out of the shades of the arcane into the full light of day."
Fred Vaughan, political science, University of Guelph
