MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2302387167

Twenty Years of Equality Rights: Reclaiming Expectations

2005· article· en· W2302387167 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bruce Porter

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisadvantagedCharterSocial equalityPolitical scienceSocial rightsCultural rightsHuman rightsDemocracyLawCorporate governanceLaw and economicsPublic administrationInternational human rights lawSociologyEconomicsPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207