In Ottawa on April 17, 1982, Queen Elizabeth II signed the Canada Act, 1982 into law, thereby ending the British Parliament’s power to amend the Canadian Constitution. This proclamation meant that Canada had become master of its own destiny on constitutional matters. Canada had, in a word, “patriated” its Constitution. One key feature of the Act was that it entrenched the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Constitution.
1982 年 4 月 17 日，英国女王伊丽莎白二世在加拿大首都渥太华正式颁布了加拿大宪法法案，结束了英国议会修改加拿大宪法的时代。这意味着加拿大在宪法层面上终于成为自己命运的主人。1982 年宪法法案最重要的特点，是把《加拿大权利与自由宪章》纳入了加拿大宪法。
With the Charter, the basic principles that Canadians’ rights and freedoms were built on (mainly, freedom and democracy) acquired constitutional status. Because it is entrenched in the Constitution, the Charter stands above all other laws.
这使加拿大人的权利所依赖的基本原则，尤其是自由和民主，获得了宪法地位。由于被纳入宪法，《加拿大权利与自由宪章》的地位高于所有其他法律。
本文禁止住转载。任何形式转载请联系作者（时光在路上 ｗｗｗ．ｔｉｍｅｚｌｓ．ｃｏｍ）。时光在路上保留所有权利
A Long Process 漫长的变迁
In a collection of essays published in 1996 as The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Brian Dickson, a former chief justice of the Supreme Court, points out that entrenching the Charter in the Constitution was the result of a long process. The saga began in 1867 when the British North America Act was passed. The process gathered speed after the Second World War once the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in 1948 and various international treaties were signed.
在他 1996 年出版的文集《加拿大权利与自由宪章》中，加拿大最高法院前首席大法官迪克森回顾说，《加拿大权利与自由宪章》被纳入加拿大宪法是一场漫长的社会变迁的结果。这场变迁始于 1867 年的《英属北美法案》，二战后随着 1948 年《人权宣言》及其他国际公约的产生而逐渐加快。
本文禁止住转载。任何形式转载请联系作者（时光在路上 ｗｗｗ．ｔｉｍｅｚｌｓ．ｃｏｍ）。时光在路上保留所有权利
In Canada, John Diefenbaker’s government enacted the Canadian Bill of Rights in 1960, and it is still in force today. In 1970, the Supreme Court, in a famous ruling (Drybones), used the Bill of Rights to strike down certain provisions of the Indian Act deemed discriminatory. The ruling was remarkable in that, for one of the first times, the Court repealed legal provisions on the basis of another law, a practice that has become common since the Charter was passed. Before the Drybones decision, the courts struck down laws only when the sharing of jurisdictions between Ottawa and the provinces hadn’t been respected.
在加拿大国内，迪芬巴克政府在 1960 年通过了《加拿大人权宣言》。它至今仍然有效。1970 年，加拿大最高法院在著名的德莱邦斯案判决中，依据人权宣言裁定《印第安人法》中的某些条款是歧视性的，因而无效。这项判决非同一般，因为这是加拿大最高法院第一次以一项法律为依据裁决另一项法律的条款无效。在《加拿大权利与自由宪章》被纳入宪法后，这成为惯常做法。在德莱邦斯案判决之前，法庭只有在联邦和省两级政府之间的权限划分没有被遵守时才会宣布某项法律无效。
本文禁止全文转载。任何形式转载请联系作者（时光在路上 ｗｗｗ．ｔｉｍｅｚｌｓ．ｃｏｍ） Copyright © 2023. All Rights Reserved
Furthermore, when the Canadian Charter came into force, a total of eight provinces had already passed laws protecting political rights and fundamental freedoms. The first was Saskatchewan back in 1943. Later, the others followed suit: Ontario in 1962, Nova Scotia in 1963, Alberta in 1966, New Brunswick in 1967, Prince Edward Island in 1968, Newfoundland in 1969, British Columbia in 1969, Manitoba in 1970 and Quebec in 1975.
另外，在《加拿大权利与自由宪章》生效时，有八个省已经通过了保护公民基本自由和政治权利的法律，萨斯喀彻温省是第一个（1943 年），接下来按时间顺序是：安大略省（1962 年），新斯科舍省（1963 年），阿尔伯塔省（1966 年），新不伦瑞克省（1967 年），爱德华王子岛省（1968 年），纽芬兰省（1969 年），卑诗省（1969 年），曼尼托巴省（1970 年），魁北克省（1975 年）。
本文禁止无授权转载 - 时光在路上 ｗｗｗ．ｔｉｍｅｚｌｓ．ｃｏｍ 保留所有权利
Impact of The Charpter《加拿大权利与自由宪章》的影响
Section 52 of the Constitution Act states that any law that is inconsistent with the Charter is of no force or effect. Section 24 holds that anyone whose rights under the Charter have been denied may apply to the courts to obtain remedy. In the past 20 years, these provisions have led to an enormous number of court appeals in the enforcement of the Charter. In his essay, Brian Dickson reported that from 1984 to 1995, the Supreme Court alone handed down some 225 rulings in cases involving the Charter. Today, this number tops 425.
根据加拿大宪法法案第 52 条，任何联邦法或省法，如果和《加拿大权利与自由宪章》不符，即为无效。法案第 24 条规定，任何人如果感到宪章赋予自己的权利受到侵犯，都可以诉诸法庭。二十年来，法庭受理了大量根据宪章提出的诉讼。前首席大法官迪克森在他的文集中说，从 1984 年到 1995 年，最高法院受理过 225 起跟宪章有关的案子。今天这个数字已经超过 425。
In the book The Charter: Ten Years After published in 1992, another Supreme Court judge, Bertha Wilson, writes that once the Charter was adopted, judges were obliged to examine their role under this legislation. They concluded they had a duty to ensure that federal and provincial governments legislated in keeping with the Constitution and with the Charter enshrined in it. Logically, judges could now rule that a certain provision was unconstitutional under the Charter, something they ended up doing time and again.
另一位最高法院大法官威尔森1992年出版了《宪章：十年后》。他说，宪章被纳入宪法后，法官不得不重新思考自己的角色定位。他们得出的结论是，法官的职责是确保政府（联邦和省）的立法符合宪法，而《加拿大权利与自由宪章》是宪法的重要组成部分。他们从此以后可以根据一条法规是否违反宪章来裁决它是否违宪。他们也多次作出这样的裁决。
本文禁止全文转载。任何形式转载请联系作者（时光在路上 ｗｗｗ．ｔｉｍｅｚｌｓ．ｃｏｍ） Copyright © 2023. All Rights Reserved
The adoption of the Charter drew and still draws considerable criticism. Some say that the Charter overly judicializes relations between Canadians, gives judges too much power or even marks the triumph of individual rights over collective rights.
《加拿大权利与自由宪章》被纳入宪法也引起了众多的批评。有些人认为这使人与人之间的关系太过法律化，有些人认为这使法官拥有的权力过大。还有些人认为这标志着个人权利战胜集体权利。
A witness to and sometimes a key player in the long constitutional debate, Senator Gérald-A. Beaudoin says that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has had a major, profound and irreversible impact on Canadians. The impact is major because of the constitutionalization of rights and freedoms, which are now protected from legislative changes just as ordinary laws are. It is profound because a great many rights and freedoms have been constitutionalized (fundamental freedoms, right to vote, legal guarantees, equality rights, language rights). And it is irreversible because Canadians now reflect more on their rights and freedoms than ever before and assert and defend them vigorously, as shown by the letters sent to the Senate by Canadians worried about the scope of certain bills. “No government would ever dare repeal the Charter and turn back the clock,” Senator Beaudoin says.
本文禁止全文转载。任何形式转载请联系作者（时光在路上 ｗｗｗ．ｔｉｍｅｚｌｓ．ｃｏｍ） Copyright © 2023. All Rights Reserved
参议员博杜安见证和参与了漫长的加拿大宪法争论。他认为，《加拿大权利与自由宪章》对加拿大人造成了重要的，深刻的和不可逆转的影响。重要，是因为在成为宪法的一部分后，《加拿大权利与自由宪章》不能像其他法律一样被议会修改。深刻，是因为被宪法化的权利和自由包括各个方面（公民基本自由，投票权，司法保证，平等权利，语言权利等等）。不可逆转，是因为加拿大人现在更加关心自己的权利和自由。他们对自己权利的坚定维护，从参议院收到的、对某些法案的影响表示担忧的公民来信可见一斑。博杜安总结说：“没有任何一个政府敢走回头路，废除《加拿大权利与自由宪章》。”
本文禁止全文转载。任何形式转载请联系作者（时光在路上 ｗｗｗ．ｔｉｍｅｚｌｓ．ｃｏｍ） Copyright © 2023. All Rights Reserved
When the Charter came into force, it also changed considerably how legal practitioners worked. They had to start looking beyond legislation at the possible impact that actions had on basic human rights. Francis Gervais, a past president of the Quebec Bar, says that lawyers must now reflect further on the implications of their acts because certain legal recourse, however valid, could be rejected for failure to comply with fundamental rights. “This has changed the job of lawyers and made it a little harder,” Mr. Gervais says. “We now have to examine issues differently. It’s a new way of thinking, but it has become second nature to us.”
宪章也极大地改变了律师的工作，迫使他们超越法律文本，对他们和当事人的言行在基本人权方面可能造成的后果加以考虑。魁北克省律师公会会长热尔维说，现在律师采取行动之前不得不想得更远。因为有些诉讼，尽管有法律依据，但是可能会因有违基本人权而被驳回。热尔维说：“律师工作的难度增加了，因为我们必须从另一个角度考虑问题。这种新的思考方式已经成为我们的第二天性。”
Caveat 限制
Brian Dickson explains, however, that the effect of the Charter wasn’t unlimited and its scope can be confined. He cites section 1 of the Charter, which allows limits placed on the exercise of certain rights and freedoms, provided that these limits are “reasonable” and “can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” He also cites section 33, which enables a government to derogate from implementing the provisions of the Charter by invoking the so-called notwithstanding clause.
然而迪克森大法官提醒说，《加拿大权利与自由宪章》并不是法力无边的。例如，宪章第一条允许对某些权利的行使加以限制，只要这些限制是“合理的并符合一个自由民主社会的价值观”。他举的另一个例子是宪章第 33 条，此条款允许政府以“无碍条款”为依据违反宪章规定。
来源：www.rcinet.ca
