Do you mean the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the laws titled British North America Act that were later named Constitution Act in 1982, which also put the Charter into force?
Because my answer is yes to the former, no to the latter.
“Whereas” marks the paragraph as part of the preamble. The preamble of legislation has no operative effect. It can be used to explain the purpose of a law which can be used when interpreting intent, but it can’t be used to create new powers or take rights away from people. It was tested in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouvement_laïque_québécois_v_Saguenay_(City) where iiuc there was an attempt to use the preamble to justify prayer in City Council meetings, and the SCC gave a unanimous ruling that it was a breech of citizen’s rights despite the “supremacy of god” whereas.
No, the preamble cannot make laws inactive. If you wanted the legislation to have a limited term (like a sunset clause) or only apply in certain circumstances, you would have to put that in the actual body of the legislation. Legislation can only be changed by act of the legislative assembly, even if it has become archaic or obsolete. I think the judiciary can strike down entire acts if the assembly refuses to fix constitutional issues, not sure how that works.
Do you mean the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the laws titled British North America Act that were later named Constitution Act in 1982, which also put the Charter into force?
Because my answer is yes to the former, no to the latter.
And, if anyone hasn’t read the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, put aside five minutes and read it.
https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/pch/documents/services/download-order-charter-bill/canadian-charter-rights-freedoms-eng.pdf
:/
You dropped the most important word of that sentence; the word that means, “This sentence has no legal bearing.”
You mean the “whereas”? Doesn’t that just mean that this is a given and everything coming after is based on this?
“Whereas” marks the paragraph as part of the preamble. The preamble of legislation has no operative effect. It can be used to explain the purpose of a law which can be used when interpreting intent, but it can’t be used to create new powers or take rights away from people. It was tested in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouvement_laïque_québécois_v_Saguenay_(City) where iiuc there was an attempt to use the preamble to justify prayer in City Council meetings, and the SCC gave a unanimous ruling that it was a breech of citizen’s rights despite the “supremacy of god” whereas.
If you say that we have law X because of reasons Y, then doesn’t it invalidate X when Y no longer holds?
No, the preamble cannot make laws inactive. If you wanted the legislation to have a limited term (like a sunset clause) or only apply in certain circumstances, you would have to put that in the actual body of the legislation. Legislation can only be changed by act of the legislative assembly, even if it has become archaic or obsolete. I think the judiciary can strike down entire acts if the assembly refuses to fix constitutional issues, not sure how that works.
Even less when you skip the meaningless parts subject to the NWC.