Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The adoption of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 has been the most radical break ever made in the constitution and legal traditions of the nation. The Charter changed the basic governing principle upon which the Canadian political system was founded: the supremacy of Parliament. By including it into the Constitution, the legislations of federal and provincial governments which were then beyond judicial reproach are now under court review to determine the consistency of the legislations to the rule of law and to pinpoint breaches that would render the legislations invalid. However, the Charter also introduced a serious tension with the constitutional pillar of Canada: federalism. This article discusses the Charter's implications on the Canadian political system since its adoption in 1982. The intersection of the Charter with federalism provides a glimpse into the promotion of identities based on “Canadianness” at the expense of “competing regional loyalties,” the defederalization of political culture, and the homogenization of the legislation. The article also discusses the implications of the Charter for the parliamentary character of Canadian politics. Three of the sections of the Charter are examined here: the limitation clause of section 1, the notwithstanding clause of section 33, and the equality rights of section 15. All of these three sections have aided the framing of the kind of rights the Charter would represent and each has revealed the manner in which the Charter had influenced legislation and political behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".