Heyy I am entering a competition for my law class regarding a "made up" peaceful protest very similar to the G20, i was told to write about rights and freedoms in the Canadian charter and apply them to society. I chose to side on societies behalf, stating the police infringed on sections 2,7,10,11 and 12 of the charter. You will understand the scenario after reading my essay, i am having trouble closing it and adding more! Will someone PLEEEASE help me lol it is due tonight at midnight!
A peaceful protest is an effective, vital, organised way of raising awareness to any specific campaign such as better education funding. A protest is not set out to be unlawful, it is set out as a tool which has been effective in gaining and enjoying some of the rights and freedoms we have to this day.
During a large but peaceful protest regarding better education funding, 10 protesters were arrested due to suspicion of crime as a result of 2 protesters tossing a brick through the local MP office as were the last of the protesters present for Breach of the Peace, after protesters expressed their opinions on education funds. This protest resulted in a series of violations of individuals Rights and Freedoms guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms including sections 2b and c, 7, 10, 11 and 12.
Police present during the protest infringed upon a total of 5 sections in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms after arresting protesters for suspicion of crime and Breach of the Peace for a max total of 24 hours. Not only did these 24 hours not have legitimate explanation behind them, these hours of arrest also took away individuals section 7 rights. Protesters held under arrest during a protest are often deprived food and water, washroom privileges, medical care and human dignity, also evident during the G20 protest.
It is written and guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that all individuals apply to Canada's Fundamental Freedoms, in section 2b which includes Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression including the press and the media. Section 2c includes Freedom of peaceful assembly, allowing peaceful protest to occur. Individuals present at the protest regarding better education funding had the right to present themselves, speaking their thoughts and opinions. Police arresting protesters for suspicion of crime and Breach of the Peace violates Section 2b and 2c. Group mentality during protest has the ability to increase stress on police officers, but does not increase violence in any matter until police use their power to arrest a person for the wrong reasons.
During the time of this peaceful protest, police also infringed on societies right to section 7, depriving food, water, human dignity, washroom privileges and medical care. Police also made unreasonable arrests, dismissing the democratic societies right to sections 10, 11 and 12. Individuals detained for a maximum of 24 hours are guaranteed rights on arrest/detention and are permitted to be informed with reason behind the arrest as stated in section 10. Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states persons have rights when charged with an offence. Section 11d specifically states one is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. During this protest, 10 protesters were assumed guilty of throwing a brick through a local MP office with no proof. Section 12 states one has the right to not be subjected to cruel and unusual treatments and/or punishments. Protesters held under arrest at this time were deprived their requested treatments and were subjected to cruel punishments which falls under their section 7 legal rights.
This peaceful protest proceeded as a composed, undisturbed campaign for better education funding until police began using their rights against societies guaranteed rights and freedoms. A democratic society must claim that their rights and freedoms including in sections 2, 7, 10, 11 and 12 were violated. Police officers arresting protesters due to suspicions and Breach of the Peace under section 1 of the charter; reasonable limits, cannot justify their acts through section 1 simply because police did not derive their actions from a legal authority that is explicit regarding what they can and cannot do. No actions towards protesters were proportional to any substantial objective a police officer wished to pursue.
Sorry - it's your homework. We don't help with homework.