Essay on R V Keegstra
R V Keegstra Term Papers
While the free essays can give you inspiration for writing, they cannot be used 'as is' because they will not meet your assignment's requirements. If you are in a time crunch, then you need a custom written term paper on your subject (r v keegstra)
Here you can hire an independent writer/researcher to custom write you an authentic essay to your specifications that will pass any plagiarism test (e.g. Turnitin). Waste no more time!
Mr. Keegstra was a high school teacher in the small Alberta town of Eckville, where he also acted as mayor for a short duration.
Mr. Keegstra had toiled in obscurity as a social studies teacher until is dismissal in 1982 after allegations that his teachings were highly anti-semetic, referring to Jews as subversive , sadistic , money loving , etc. As well, Keegstra denied the holocaust and reinforced his views by giving grades to those who agreed with his teachings. If they failed to agree, their marks suffered greatly
1984, Mr. Keegstra was charged under s.319(2) of the criminal code with unlawfully promoting the hatred against an identifiable group by the communication of anti-sementic statement s to his students.
Applying to the Court of Queens Bench in Alberta , Keegstra demanded that the charges against him be quashed under the grounds that s.319 of the Criminal Code was an unjust infringement upon his s.2 Charter Right to the freedom of expression. Justice Quigley was quick to dismiss Keegstra s s.2(b) argument, stating that it is beyond doubt that breeding hate is detrimental to society for psychological and social reasons and that it can easily create hostility and aggression which leads to violence .
His decision provided an argumentative balance between freedom of expression and the much more collective social cohesion of the common good. Under this clause Quigley then justified that section 319(2) had a reasonable limit over section 2(b) under s.1 of the Charter. Keegstra was convicted and charged.
-Keegstra then appealed his case to the Alberta Court of Appeal in 1988. On top of the infringement argument of s.2(b) by s.319(2), Keegstra also argued that s.319(3) of the Code was an infringement of s. 11(d) of the Charter pertaining to the presumption of innocence.
- Section 319(3)(a) places a reverse onus on the accused to provide truth of the statements communicated. This automatically places responsibly on the accused to prove him/herself innocent. In defense this was seen as an infringement of charter rights particularly under s. 11(d) where the accused is presumed innocent until found guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.
- On both issues Justice Kerans J.A. found that the Charter had been violated , and that s.319(2) had actually failed the proportionality test, reasoning that the section itself was to general in definition and failed to recognize sections 15 and 27 of the Charter dealing with multiculturalism, as he felt that they need not apply to the specific case. The appeal by Keegstra was allowed.
Keegstra s fate was then left in the hands of the Supreme Court of Canada
Issues:
The following constitutional questions were developed to help make the Supreme Court decision (pg. 90, course pack)
1) Is s.319(2) of the Criminal code Canada R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) an infringement of freedom of expression as guaranteed under s.2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
2) If s.319(2) of the Criminal code Canada R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) is an infringement of s.(2)(b) the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , can it be upheld under s.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a reasonable limit prescribed by law and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society?
Is s.319(3)(a) of the Criminal code Canada R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) an infringement of freedom of expression as guaranteed under s.11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
If s.319(3)(a) of the Criminal code Canada R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) is an infringement of s.11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , can it be upheld under s.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a reasonable limit prescribed by law and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society?
All seven judges on the Supreme Court of Canada Panel agreed that s.319(2) of the Criminal Code was an infringement on s.2(b) of the Charter. Reasons for this decision include:
Following the precedence laid out in Irwin Toy, stating that expression has both ...
MLA Style
. EssayMania.com. Retrieved on 11 Feb, 2012 from
<http://essaymania.com/131902/r-v-keegstra>
More College Papers
Quebec Nationalism
It is sometimes hard for English Canadians to grasp how deeply many French Canadians feel the loss of control over their identity. A generation ago, it was summed up in a book by FLQ philosopher Pierre Vallieres, who compared the plight of Quebecers to the oppression of blacks in the United States
Punishment Vs. Treatment
The punishment or treatment of addictive pregnant women and the risk of mental illness on their unborn child are very controversial issues in social work today(Young, 1996, 33). Should child-removal or time in a correctional facility punish substance abusing pregnant women, or should they be senten
Punishment 9
When someone does something against the law they have committed a crime. They then have to be punished. The law decides the punishment. Individuals and the community decide the law.
Crime is one of the biggest problems in the world today. It is an issue that has been debated for many years. Plenty