Canadian Bill of Rights

The Canadian Bill of Rights () is a federal statute and bill of rights enacted by the Parliament of Canada on August 10, 1960. It provides Canadians with certain rights at Canadian federal law in relation to other federal statutes. It was the earliest expression of human rights law at the federal level in Canada, though an implied Bill of Rights had already been recognized in the Canadian Common Law.
The "Canadian Bill of Rights" remains in effect but is widely acknowledged to be limited in its effectiveness because it is a federal statute only, and so not directly applicable to provincial laws. These legal and constitutional limitations were a significant reason that the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" was established as an unambiguously-constitutional-level Bill of Rights for all Canadians, governing the application of both federal and provincial law in Canada, with the patriation of the Constitution of Canada in 1982. Since patriation, its usefulness at federal law in Canada is mostly limited to issues pertaining to the enjoyment of property, as set forth in its section 1(a)]—a slightly-broader "life, liberty, and security of the person" right than is recognized in section seven of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms".
Background.
Saskatchewan's Bill of Rights.
In 1947, Saskatchewan passed into law a bill of rights which covered both fundamental freedoms and equality rights. Saskatchewan's Bill of Rights is considered to have had a formative influence on John Diefenbaker, who was from Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. Thirteen years later, Diefenbaker successfully introduced the "Canadian Bill of Rights", in 1960.
United Nations.
In 1948, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Civil rights activists in Canada had for some time been advocating for the elimination from Canadian laws of discrimination based on sex, ethnicity, race and religion; the new declaration led to an increasing call for protection of human rights in Canada.
John Diefenbaker and a National Bill of Rights.
In 1936, four years before being elected to Parliament, John Diefenbaker began drafting his Bill of Rights. As a young boy, he saw injustice first-hand in the form of discrimination against French-Canadians, natives, Métis and European immigrants.
On March 16, 1950, a decade before the "Canadian Bill of Rights" became law, Diefenbaker, then a Saskatchewan MP, told a public forum why such a law was needed. Individuals' freedoms of religion, press, speech and association are threatened by the state, he said. A Bill of Rights was needed to take a "forthright stand against discrimination based on colour, creed or racial origin".
Diefenbaker advocated for the adoption of a bill of rights during the federal election campaign of 1957. In 1960, as prime minister, Diefenbaker introduced the "Canadian Bill of Rights", and it was enacted by Parliament.
Features.
The "Canadian Bill of Rights" protects numerous rights, most of which were later included in the Charter. Examples include:
Section 2 of the Bill of Rights reads as follows:
The notwithstanding wording of section 2 is a precursor to the notwithstanding clause of the Charter.
While the Bill of Rights is considered only quasi-constitutional because it was enacted as an ordinary Act of the Parliament of Canada, it contains the following provision:
Criticism and support.
Criticism of the Bill of Rights has mostly centred on its limited effect. The ineffectiveness of the Bill of Rights in achieving its stated aim was the main reason that two decades later, it was thought necessary to adopt a constitutionally-entrenched charter.
The Bill of Rights was (and is) limited in several ways.
Firstly, it does not explicitly amend any conflicting statutes, either to remove conflicts or to insert explicit allowances for the statutes to operate notwithstanding the Bill of Rights. When called upon to apply conflicting laws, the courts typically sought to interpret a later statute as creating a minimal disturbance of earlier law. In practice, that meant that the courts relied on Parliament to repeal or amend any laws contrary to the Bill of Rights. Disappointments for those who wanted courts to enforce rights vigorously included "Bliss v Canada (AG)" and "Canada (AG) v Lavell". A notable exception was "R v Drybones".
Second, since the Bill of Rights was not a constitutional amendment, there was some debate as to whether it was binding on future Parliaments.
Third, because it is an ordinary statute, the authority of the Bill of Rights is limited to matters set out in Section 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867, as being under the legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada.
However, the 1960 Act enumerates some rights (such as property rights and specific legal rights) not protected under the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms". For that and other reasons, the 1960 Act is regularly referenced in court decisions today.