Law and the Constitution in Canada - Essay Example

Law and the Constitution in Canada The contemporary Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) plays a fundamental vitality in Canadian politics and judicial decisions. The courts’ decisions cover variety of legal concerns including rights and freedoms, criminal law, federalism, and civil law. The inherent judicial decisions and relations to the Canadian society require integration of legal scholars with significant application of legal scholarship and reasoning. Such legal scholarly concepts remain imperative in acceptance and understanding of various cases for instance the Delgamuukw case.

Legal reasoning relates to the communicative strategies and ways through which judges publicly talk concerning law1. Legal reasoning is essential in explaining the inherent difference between partisan and impartial legal decisions. Legal reasoning remains indispensable in arbitration of varied beliefs and values of the Canadian society towards acceptance of legal decisions2. Moreover, legal reasoning is domineering in harmonizing Canadian society perspectives about legal integrity. Furthermore, it enables the Canadian society to comply with SCC legal decisions over varied cases even though they may seem to disagree.

Similarly, legal scholarship has had notable contributions to realization of a more acceptable Canadian legal system through establishment of doctrinal scholarship and creation of linkage with other disciplines. Through legal scholarship, legal scholars established a doctrinal analysis system that explains, criticizes, and analyses Canadian judicial decisions. In addition, legal scholars have created brilliant doctrinal scholarship proposals methods of decision making within judicial systems especially in constitutional law.

Besides doctrinal analysis, legal scholarship has ensured incorporation of other discipline concepts such as economics, philosophy, and literary theory in making legal decisions3 (Bourne 2011). Due to the aforementioned concepts and functions of legal reasoning and scholarship, the Canadian society have accepted Aboriginals rights and title as outlined in section 35 (1). SCC have the legal rights to interpret s35 (1) to the Canadian society, a responsibility that they have achieved through legal reasoning (Turner 2006).

In addition, legal scholarship and reasoning remains imperative in explaining the inherent judicial process in making decision relating to acceptance of aboriginals rights. Acceptance and affirmation of aboriginal rights required doctrinal scholarship analysis and legal reasoning of several cases including the Delgamuukw case4. Legal reasoning and scholarship remained integral in making ruling over aboriginals rights based on Delgamuukw case. The case required understanding of the scope of history, social sciences, economy and politics that remained understandable due to doctrinal scholarship analysis contributed by critical legal scholars knowledge.

Historical reasoning enabled SCC to observe ancestral rights of the aboriginals as constituted in s35 (1) of the constitution Act, 1982. Moreover, legal reasoning remained significant in explaining aboriginal rights relative to their territorial occupation before sovereignty declaration. BibliographyBourne, C.B. The Canadian Yearbook of International Law, Volume 26; Volume 1988. UBC Press, 2011.Columbia Law School. Academic Writing and Publishing. 2014. Web. December 6, 2014. Retrieved from http://web.law.columbia.

edu/law-teaching/services-current-candidates/academic-writing-and-publishing. MacCormick, Neil. Practical reason in law and morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. R. v. Delgamuukw [1998] 1 C.N.L.R. 14 (S.C.C.), revg [1993] 5 C.N.L.R. 1 (B.C.C.A.), which revg [1991] 5 C.N.L.R. 1 (B.C.S.C.).Turner, Daler. This Is Not a Peace Pipe: Towards a Critical Indigenous Philosophy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press , 2006.