Part B: Charter Limitation and Authority - Aditya.

Questions:

1. What legislation did the provincial government propose? Why did it invoke the
notwithstanding clause?

2. The issue of involuntary sterilization, especially after World War II, violates many moral and
ethical principles. Why do you think sterilizations in Alberta continued until 1972, and why did it
take so long for the victims to be compensated?

3. Do you think it is the responsibility of taxpayers in Alberta to compensate victims for abuses
committed by previous governments?

Answers:

m
er as
1. The Alberta government introduced Bill 26. The proposed Institutional Confinement and

co
eH w
Sexual Sterilization Act would limit compensation to $150 000 per claim and protect the
government from legal challenges under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by

o.
invoking the notwithstanding clause and it allowed provincial legislatures to override
rs e
certain portions of the Charter; which is what the bill required to remain in action. they
ou urc
were not successful, they received overwhelming outbursts of protest from the media,
civil rights groups, and the general populace; many legal experts argued they would
have saved more money by performing negotiations with the individuals who were suing
o

the government as opposed to proposing the bill.

aC s
vi y re

2. The reason why this was allowed to continue long because the board’s activities were
very secretive. Each time any political bill attempted to hamper or completely stop the
board’s activity, they would legal “loopholes” to allow them to continue to perform.In
ed d

1972, Mr. King finally proposed a bill to revoke the Confinement and Sexual Sterilization
ar stu

Act under three measures: The Sexual Sterilization Act was based on medical and
genetics theories which are now of questionable scientific validity, the Act was full of
legal ambiguities, most notably in the section exempting surgeons from civil liability and
legal opinion provided to the government suggested that this exemption was most likely
is

ineffective
Th

3. No, logically I do not believe it is the taxpayers’ responsibility to compensate the victims
of abuses committed by the previous government. As stated in the article, many of the
sh

people in the current government and taxpayers were not even alive when these gross
abuses of power occurred in secrecy. However, I do believe that the government should
provide compensation because like any government they must inherit the positive and
negative aspects of their predecessor government and do their best to resolve them so
their successor does not have to deal with them.

This study source was downloaded by 100000828953239 from CourseHero.com on 11-25-2021 12:42:27 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/108115718/unit-2-module-4docx/
 m
er as
co
eH w
o.
rs e
ou urc
o
aC s
vi y re
ed d
ar stu
is
Th
sh

This study source was downloaded by 100000828953239 from CourseHero.com on 11-25-2021 12:42:27 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/108115718/unit-2-module-4docx/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)