Section 7

1. Section 7 Life, Liberty & Security of the Person

2. Section 7 • Life laws that affect the beginning of life or the end of life have been challenged. • Liberty any law imposing a penalty of imprisonment could be affected, as could such issues as prison discipline or security measures imposing extra confinement, or parole or release procedures • Security of the Person  couldinvolve laws that provide for medical or psychiatric treatment, sterilization or other forms of intrusion by the state

3. Section 7 • Principles of Fundamental Justice • The phrase is not a protected right but rather qualifies the protected right not to be deprived of "life, liberty and security of the person“ • "have sought to achieve ... a just accommodation between the interests of the individual and those of the state, both of which factors play a part in assessing whether a particular law violates the principles of fundamental justice." It is this balancing that the courts attempt in every Charter case.

4. Rodriguez v. Attorney General of British Columbia • Consider the scope of the "principles of fundamental justice" that must be complied with in legislation that may deprive an individual of life, liberty or security of the person. • At issue in this case was the validity of section 241 (b) of the Criminal Code, which prohibits aiding or abetting suicide. The appellant, suffering from a ALS, sought a declaration that would allow a physician to assist her in taking her own life at some future time when she would likely be unable to commit suicide without help.

5. Rodriguez1993 • 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Ms. Rodriguez’s appeal, finding that section 241(b) impinged on her right to security of the person guaranteed by section 7, but not in a way violating any principle of fundamental justice. • In dissenting reasons, Madam Justice McLachlin argued that section 241(b) did offend the principles of fundamental justice by depriving the appellant of the right to deal with her own body as she chose. Furthermore, the law could not be demonstrably justified under section 1, since an absolute prohibition on assisted suicide is not necessary to protect the vulnerable; existing provisions of the Criminal Code, along with a requirement for a court order to permit assistance, would accomplish that.

6. Rodriguez • Chief Justice Lamer would have declared section 241(b) invalid because it infringed equality rights guaranteed under section 15(1) of the Charter since it deprived those unable to end their lives without assistance of the option of choosing suicide. • "fairness of the judicial process is what, in the end, fundamental justice is all about."

7. Section 7 • R. v. Morgentaler= Abortion laws (s.251 CC) • 5-2 decision that struck down the provisions in the CC • 3 Main Decisions • 1) Dickson & Lamer • Security of the Person  State interference with bodily integrity and serious state-imposed psychological stress • Forcing women by criminal sanction to carry a foetus to full term would be a violation of S.7 • Therapeutic abortions would cause more risk and thus more serious consequences for women

8. Section 7 • 2) Judges Beetz and Estey • Security of the person” within the meaning of s. 7 of the Charter must include a right of access to medical treatment for a condition representing a danger to life or health without fear of criminal sanction. • Women should not have to choose between their own life and that of another, violated S.7.

9. Section 7 • Judge Wilson • Section 251 of the Criminal Code takes a personal and private decision away from the woman and gives it to a committee. • Section 251 also deprives a pregnant woman of her right to security of the person under s. 7 of the Charter. This right protects both the physical and psychological integrity of the individual. • State should have no interference with one’s body = direct violation of a “physical” person • The KEY is HARM!