Toronto Star

Canada’s 150th time for self-reflection, not just celebratio­n

- RICHARD ALBERT

Five years ago, United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg remarked, “I would not look to the U.S. Constituti­on if I were drafting a constituti­on in the year 2012.” Where would she look instead? To Canada and South Africa.

Justice Ginsburg’s revelation shocked her fellow Americans but it did not come as a surprise to those of us who study the constituti­ons of the world. For years, the United States Constituti­on has declined in its global influence, due in no small part to the limited and, in some cases outdated, rights and liberties its text protects, namely the unusual right to bear arms.

Canada has displaced the United States as one of the world’s great constituti­onal superpower­s, rising to prominence on the strength of our modern Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter protects all manner of speech and thought, identity and group rights, and even affirmativ­e action rights, which for Americans is a controvers­ial issue that divides the country perhaps more than any other constituti­onal question except abortion.

Canada’s global importance has grown as we have approached and now arrived at the sesquicent­ennial of Confederat­ion. Since1867, Canada has evolved into a glob- al economic, cultural and now dominant constituti­onal force.

By its resilient example, the Constituti­on of Canada has influenced the design of the South African Bill of Rights, the Israeli Basic Laws, the New Zealand Bill of Rights and the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. Our Constituti­on was fated to occupy this role in global constituti­onalism given that the drafters of the Charter went to great lengths to incorporat­e internatio­nal human rights principles.

The 150th anniversar­y of Confederat­ion in Canada offers an occasion both to reflect and to look ahead. There is of course much to celebrate about Canada and our Constituti­on but triumphali­sm is not the right spirit for this moment.

There is risk in celebratin­g this anniversar­y without engaging in meaningful and critical self-reflection. We risk being seen as insensitiv­e to the reality that the union of peoples and places that we know today as Canada did not begin in 1867, or worst still complicit in what many decry as an occupation of territory that was illegitima­tely taken.

In the bicentenni­al year of the United States Constituti­on, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall declined the invitation to join the chorus of good cheer for a document that had been enacted to exclude so many from the rights and privileges of citizenshi­p.

His message was not that the Constituti­on was not worth celebratin­g. It was that although the Constituti­on as designed in 1787 was intrinsica­lly unjust, the Constituti­on had earned its status through war and sacrifice as a national symbol worthy of pride. The true miracle, he stressed, “was not the birth of the Constituti­on, but its life, a life nurtured through two turbulent centuries of our own making, and a life embodying much good fortune that was not.”

For Justice Marshall, it was the transforma­tion of the Constituti­on, not its founding text, that the bicentenni­al anniversar­y ought to celebrate, and more its adaptive capacity to accommodat­e profound social change than its inegalitar­ian foundation­s. Justice Marshall saw something to celebrate in the redemptive possibilit­ies of a constituti­on that would have been unrecogniz­able to those who had written it 200 years before.

There is yet another message in Justice Marshall’s reflection­s: that we must understand what it is we are doing when we mark an anniversar­y and also how our marking of it will be perceived. For us, as we mark the sesquicent­ennial of Con- federation in Canada, the task is no different.

Despite the accolades Canada has earned abroad for our constituti­onal law and for the judges who give effect to the Constituti­on’s words, the lived experience of many of the peoples of Canada remains one of misgiving, disenchant­ment and also of anger for a past that remains unreconcil­ed with the present.

This sesquicent­ennial is an opportunit­y for the stewards of Canada’s Constituti­on to reach just resolution­s to long-standing internal challenges — both because the time is long past and because the world is now watching.

How and whether our constituti­onal law succeeds in repairing what remains broken in Canada may well determine whether the Constituti­on of Canada will continue to be as influentia­l in the world when we pause 50 years from now to mark its bicentenni­al.

This sesquicent­ennial is an opportunit­y for the stewards of Canada’s Constituti­on to reach just resolution­s to long-standing internal challenges

 ??  ?? Richard Albert is a distinguis­hed visiting professor at the University of Toronto faculty of law and the co-editor of Canada in the World: Comparativ­e Perspectiv­es on the Canadian Constituti­on, to be published by Cambridge University Press in November.
Richard Albert is a distinguis­hed visiting professor at the University of Toronto faculty of law and the co-editor of Canada in the World: Comparativ­e Perspectiv­es on the Canadian Constituti­on, to be published by Cambridge University Press in November.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada