NCJ Number
212476
Journal
International Journal of Victimology Volume: 12 Issue: 2 Dated: 2005 Pages: 189-211
Date Published
2005
Length
23 pages
Annotation
This article examines the extent to which the issues of statutory construction and judicial precedent produced the 2004 ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of the Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law versus Canada (Attorney General) in which the Foundation argued that the corporal punishment defense denies children rights that are guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Abstract
Within Canada’s corporal punishment defense, contained in section 43 of the Criminal Code, an educator, parent, or guardian is justified in using force by way of correction toward a pupil or child, who is under his/her care, if the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the circumstances. In 2004, in the Supreme Court of Canada case of Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law versus Canada (Attorney General), the Supreme Court rejected and ended the attempt of children’s rights advocates in Canada to have the courts declare the defense of no force and effect. The Foundation argued that the corporal punishment defense unreasonably infringes the rights of children as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This article analyzed the issues of statutory construction and judicial precedent and the extent to which these issues produced the 2004 ruling. The resulting decision unfortunately inverts the focus of concern for the victims of corporal punishment from the children who are subject to it, to the educators and parents who may be prosecuted for it. 90 notes