Judicial Branch In Canada

The judicial branch in Canada is a key element to the division of power. The judiciary branch is an uninfluenced and independent from the legislative and executive branch, the judges are appointed by the Prime Minister and their role is to interpret and apply the laws of Canada as written in the Canadian Constitution.

There are two essential principals in modern democracy; the rule of law (La primauté du droit) and the separation of powers (Lampron p. 218). The rule of law is the idea that no one is above the law. This theory allows for a healthy democracy as authority must practice is powers legitimately and in accordance with written and publically adapted laws. Furthermore, the rule of law shields Canada from the possibility of a totalitarian

Judicial review allows for the challenging of state actions in order to ensure that decisions made by the government follow laws. In Canada, laws must be brought to the supreme court to be challenged and the court may not arbitrarily open cases. The goal of judicial review is to assure citizens that power is not being abused at any level of government and that the rule of law is being followed. The Supreme Court of Canada falls under the judicial branch of the government, its role is to interpret the Canadian constitution and decide whether or not laws are constitutional. The judges must read between the lines of the Canadian constitution and seek the un-written rules in order to decide to if a law is constitutional or not. This branch, along with judicial review limits the power of the sovereign of the parliament as the parliament is ultimately no longer the sovereign, but rather the constitution itself if the sovereign. Furthermore, with the court having the ability to disapprove the law, the executive, and legislative branch are clearly not sovereigns as they are not the supreme

The idea of democracy is to let people choose their own leaders. In the case of the supreme court judges, they hold some of the most important decisions, without being elected. For me, this is a problem because as time changes and society evolves, the people running the country and making such decisions must have the same morals and ideas as the people living within the society. For example, as most of Canada accepted the idea of same sex marriage, it was still being decided in the highest courts even though society had already accepted it. Furthermore, I think that it is important for the judges to have the influence of society backing their decisions because if the judges are impartial to societies views, Canadian laws will no coincide with the mannerisms of the current and evolving society. Moreover, I think that a lifelong position for someone who is not supported by Canadian citizens is ridicules and doesn’t allow for proper representation of the publics needs and