Fundamental Interests and Fundamental Justice - The Right to Participate in Decision-Making in Canadian Prisons: Piche v. Solicitor General of Canada

24 University of British Columbia Law Review 361-379, 1990

19 Pages Posted: 20 Sep 2013

See all articles by Martha Jackman

Martha Jackman

University of Ottawa - Common Law Section

Date Written: 1990

Abstract

In Piche v. Solicitor General of Canada, the trial judge and Federal Court of Appeal rejected the claim that prisoners' section 7 rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated when a penitentiary implemented a double-bunking policy, without notice or consultation with inmates. The comment reviews the evidence submitted at trial, and assesses whether the inmates' rights to life, liberty and security of the person were affected by the double-bunking decision, and whether the principles of fundamental justice were upheld. The comment concludes that failure to recognize the relationship between participation and justice is particularly unfortunate in the prison context, since participation in the elaboration of prison rules may be the most effective mechanism for ensuring that inmates' constitutional rights in prison are respected.

Keywords: Piche, Canada, Solicitor General, prison, prisoners, jail, penitentiary, Charter of Rights, section 7, life, liberty, security, inmates, fundamental justice, participation, constitution

Suggested Citation

Jackman, Martha, Fundamental Interests and Fundamental Justice - The Right to Participate in Decision-Making in Canadian Prisons: Piche v. Solicitor General of Canada (1990). 24 University of British Columbia Law Review 361-379, 1990. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2319190

Martha Jackman (Contact Author)

University of Ottawa - Common Law Section ( email )

57 Louis Pasteur Street
Ottawa, K1N 6N5
Canada

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
15
Abstract Views
452
PlumX Metrics