Notice bibliographique
Résumé
April 17, 2005 marked the twentieth anniversary of section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In this paper, the author reviews the writings of equality specialists in 1985 and the submissions of equality seeking and other groups before the Parliamentary Sub-Committee on Equality Rights in 1985, to assess what was expected, in 1985, of the new guarantee of equality rights. The author finds that the expansive wording and coverage of section 15 for which equality seeking groups had lobbied, including the words equal benefit of the and a guarantee of equality rights for people with mental and physical disabilities that was unprecedented, was understood as having effected a dramatic shift in the idea of equality. It was believed that successful lobbying had moved the protection of equality beyond a right to freedom from discrimination, even in benefit programs, to a broadly framed guarantee of equality as a positive social right. Section 15 was thus understood by equality seekers to impose obligations on governments to take positive measures to address systemic patterns of socio-economic disadvantage and to incorporate social and economic rights which Canada had affirmed under international law such as the right to housing, to education, to an adequate income and to fulfilling work. These types of positive obligations were expected to be enforced by courts where necessary, but equality seekers also envisioned a new model of participatory and accountable governance in which disadvantaged groups would be newly empowered as rights-holders. Reviewing developments in courts and in governance in Canada over the last twenty years, the author concludes that these central expectations have remained largely unrealized. Despite some significant victories in Charter litigation with positive remedial implications, the Supreme Court of Canada has ultimately failed to hear or to honour the central claim to equality that was at the core of what rights holders expected of the right to equality in 1985. Similarly, governments have marginalized, rather than mainstreamed, equality rights in governance. Human rights institutions have failed to promote and enforce the broad right to equality envisioned in 1985. Considering whether, in light of these disappointments, Canadians have perhaps expected too much of the right to equality, the author concludes that we ought not to be talked out of our expectations. An expectation that the right to equality can act as a vehicle for the protection not only from discrimination but also as a guarantee of social and economic rights which in other constitutions are enumerated separately was a unique feature of Canada's emerging constitutional democracy which ought not to be lost.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».