Study Guides (248,403)
Canada (121,540)
York University (10,191)
POLS 2200 (13)

Final Exam Prep.docx

7 Pages
Unlock Document

Political Science
POLS 2200
Khashayar Hooshiyar

Final Exam Prep 1. Regulatory Offences A regulatory offence is a class of crime in which the standard for proving culpability has been lowered so a mens rea (Guilty Mind) element is not required. Such offences are used to deter potential offenders from dangerous behaviour rather than to impose punishment for moral wrongdoing. For Example, ticketing for Speeding. Regulatory offenses are also called statutory offenses and often impose strict liability upon defendants for their violation.There are three categories of regulatory offences, they are as follows; • mens rea offences – these offences consist of “some positive state of mind”, such as intent, knowledge or recklessness, and must be proven by the prosecution by additional evidence; • strict liability offences – for these offences the prosecution is not required to prove mens rea, as the doing of the prohibited act based on the first impression imports the offence, • absolute liability offences – for these offences, it is not open to the defendant to exculpate himself/herself by showing that he/she was “free of fault” 2. Indictable Offences ; An offence for which a grand jury rules that there is enough evidence to charge defendant with a felony; a crime punishable by a term in the state penitentiary in Canada. Indictable offences are more serious offences that cannot be heard in the absence of the defendant (the person accused of the crime). These offences are usually heard in the lower courts for a committal hearing. The offence may then be committed for trial before a judge in a higher court such as the Supreme Court. Types of indictable offences include: aggravated burglary, indecent assault, drug trafficking offences, murder and manslaughter. In Canada, there are maximum penalties for indictable offences which may vary and include life in prison. Some indictable offences have minimum penalties based on the level of seriousness of a crime. For example; possession of a controlled substance of marijuana in large amounts 3. Prerogative Remedies These are the remedies that are issued on the strength of the inherent powers of the court to enforce its order and to do justice. Prerogative remedies are all discretionary. In many cases many judges do not grant the remedy. They can deny it based on; • If the applicant has waved his rights to object to the defect in the proceedings • Whether there is unreasonable delay in bringing the application for judicial review to get a remedy • There is a time limit imposed after the appeal is made, to make the decision (usually 10 days). If you don’t appeal it you can’t ask for a remedy • Applicants conduct o Could disentitle him or her to the remedy (if their conduct has been in bad faith, deceitful, or if the judge has improper motives • Substantial prejudice is required to look into the issue of discrimination and fairness 4. Habeas Corpus It is a writ (court order) that requires a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court. The principle of habeas corpus ensures that a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention—that is, detention lacking sufficient cause or evidence. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to the prisoner's aid. This right originated in the English legal system, and is now available in many nations. It has historically been an important legal instrument safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action. For example, a person being held without charges or probation has been summarily terminated without a cause. 5. Security Certificate The security certificate process within the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act is not a criminal proceeding, but an immigration proceeding. The objective of the process is the removal from Canada of non-Canadians who have no legal right to be here and who pose a serious threat to Canada and the Canadians. All individuals subject to a certificate have been deemed to be inadmissible for reasons of national security, violating human or international rights, or involvement in organized or serious crimes. The length of time it takes to remove an inadmissible person is determined by a range of factors and is different from one case to another. In more straightforward cases, removal can occur very expeditiously. Individuals currently subject to security certificates have exercised their right to pursue appeals of removal decisions made against them. 6. Liberal Legalism It is a belief that politics should be constrained by legal constitutional boundaries. Liberal legalism has also been called legal constitutionalism, the aim is to confine politics to the straight-jacket of law. It is argued that courts and constitutions are a poor check on executive or legislative authority. They must wait for court decisions to bubble up from lesser courts before they can act; since this process can take years, even decades, to happen, the court is usually slow to act. It is preferred to have a parliamentary system like Britain's that could be more suitable and more effective at restraining governments, and sees flaws in the government system of having courts check executive power. 7. Coroner A coroner is a government official who confirms and certifies the death of an individual within a jurisdiction.Acoroner may also conduct or order an investigation into the manner or cause of death, and confirm the identity of an unknown person who has been found dead. Responsibilities may include overseeing the investigation and certification of deaths related to mass disasters that may have occurred. In Canada, two systems exist in investigating all unnatural and natural unexpected, unexplained, or unattended deaths; coroner or medical examiner. While the name differs, they act in similar capacities as they do not determine civil or criminal responsibility but instead, make and offer recommendations to improve public safety and prevention of death in similar circumstances. 8. Individual Rights Vs Collective Rights Aprominent issue in human rights is between collective rights and individual rights. Collective rights protect a group of people, while individual rights protect the individual. It is especially important to take into account both collective and individual rights when condemning certain "violations" of human right. Individual rights are often associated with political and economic freedom, whereas group rights are associated with social control. This is because in the West the establishment of individual rights is associated with equality before the law and protection from the state. Examples of this are the Magna Carta, in which the English King accepted that his will could be bound by the law and certain rights of the King's subjects were explicitly protected. It is argued that people are less likely to violate the law if they believe that the legal system is likely to punish them if they actually violated the law and not punish them if they did not violate the law. By contrast, if the legal system is arbitrary then an ind
More Less

Related notes for POLS 2200

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.