INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy subrnitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of cornputer pnnter. The quality of this reproduction is dapendant upon the qwlity of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, coiored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bieedthrough, substandarà margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noteâ. Also, if unauthotized copyright matenal had to be removed, a note wÏll indicate the deletion. Ovenize materials (e.g.. maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by secüoning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in eqwl sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have ben reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographie prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Bell 8 Howell Information and Leaming 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 USA Legitimate Constitutional Change and The Debate on Quebec Secession Alissa Malkin A thesis subrnitted in confomity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws Graduate Department of Law University of Toronto (6 Copyright by Alissa Malkin 1998 National Library Bibliothèque nationale (91 of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence aliowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sel1 reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of ths thesis in rnicroform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownersbip of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thése. thesis nor substantial extracts f?om it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or ohenvise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Abstract Legitimate Cwtitutional Change and the Debate on Qwbec Secession Alissa Malkin Master of Laws 1998, Graduate Department of Law University of Toronto I propose a theory of what constitutes legitimate constitutional amendment in Canada. I argue that the Constitution of Canada is in essence a tradition, the continuity of which is provided by a particular set of values embodied in principles, institutions and remedies. These are informed by a certain conception of the individual; and developed wer the centuries in order to further a certain understanding of human dignity. Canadians have been shaped as a people within this tradition; and political and legal legitimacy therefore depend upon continued conformity to its underlying values. Legitimate constitutional change must be in accordance with these values. Secession of a province, like any other cmstitutional change occuring within this tradition, must respect the relation between individual liberty and democratic governance within which our tradition's understanding of individual dignity is best realized. I suggest that the debate over Quebec secession should be framed in these tenns. Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction.................................................................................. 5 Chapter 2: The Constitution of Canada .......................................................... 16 1. The Compact Theory of Confe&ration .......................................... 18 Rovincial Compact ............................................................. 19 Two Nations........................................................................... 21 2. The Constitution and The People of Canada ................................... 35 Tradition............................................................................... 35 Constitutional Legitimacy..................................................... 38 The People of Canada .............................................................43 Sovereignty........................................................................... 47 3 . Conclusions............................................................................. 52 Chapter 3: Constitutional Values.................................................................. 54 1. Our Constitutional Inheritance.................................................... 55 Autonomy. Equality. Dignity ............................................. 64 2 . Our Confederation Arrangements................................................. 68 3 . The Canadian Continuation of This Tradition................................ 73 Legislative Supremacy ......................................................... 74 Evolving Political Consciousness......................................... 77 Liberty and Dernocracy.................................................... 84 4 . Conclusions................................................................................... 86 Chapter 4: Consitutional Change .................................................................. 89 1. Continuity and Legitimate Constitutional Change......................... 90 2 . Legal Limitations on Constitutional Change................................. 95 3 . Conclusions.................................................................................. 1 10 Chapter 5: Secession................................................................................... 1 12 1. Secession Within The Constitution.............................................. 1 14 2 . Justibing Secession.................................................................... 1 21 3 . Conclusions.................................................................................. 1 29 Chapter 6: Conclusion................................................................................. 131 How far does a constitution affect the character of a people? I have no doubt that the effect of constitutions was much exaggerated one hundred years ago and later on no one I suppose now questions that, in general, a constitution is, in the main, the outcome of the character and history of the people on whom it exists. But then do people not too readily assume, when al1 this is granted, that a constitution does not in tum affect the character of a people and the history of a country?l A.V. Dicey Letter to James Bryce. Ms. Bryce Papers 3, December 15, 1 901 (Fol. 6) quoted in "Dicey in Historical Perspective: A Review Essay", John F. McEldowney, in Law, Legitimacy, and the Cmstitution Patrick McAuslan and John F. McEldowney eds. (London: Sweet and Maxwell, 1985) p.39 at p.61. Chapter 1: Introduction The aim of this thesis is to suggest a frarnework for debating the legitimacy of any proposed change to the Constitution of Canada. I offer a theory of what constitutes legitimate amendment and propose a standard agaimt which any particular constitutional change may be measured. My interest in undertaking this project developed while listening to the puMic debate surrounding the recent Quebec referendum.2 Staternents made by representatives of the two official 'sidest in the debate consisted, for the most part, in appeals to principle rather than assertions of force. Each side seemed intent on persuading the Canadian public that their position was the legitimate one. But according to what standard was legitimacy to be judged? Very different ideas about comtitutional legitimacy seemed to underlie the opposing positions. Thus the secession debate seerned characterized by a strange confusion: while the very exercise was premised on the assumption that there is a common set of values to which al1 participants can appeaf, the notions of legitimacy underlying the positions taken seemed very much at odds. 20n October 30, 1995 Quebeckers voted in a referendum on Quebec secession. Electors were asked: "Do yw agree that Quebec should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new Econornic and Political Partnership, within the scope of the Bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1 99 5?" The latter referred to an agreement signed by the leaders of the Parti-Québécois, the Bloc Québécois and the Action Démocratique, outlining their common project for the sovereignty of Quebec. According to this agreement, following a Yes vote in a referendurn the National Assembiy would be empawered to proclaim the sovereignty of Quebec; and the guvemmnt obligated to prapose to Canada an agreement cm a new economic and political partnership. Bill 1, "An Act respecting the future of Québec" (1st Sess., 35th Leg., Quebec, 1995) authorized the National Assernbly to proclaim the sovereignty of Quebec, following a fonnal offer of economic and political partnership with Canada. (s.1). The result of the referendum was 50.58% for "No" and 49.42% for "Yes". Québec, Rappot des résultats officiels du scrutin: réf&endum du 30 octobre 1995 (Québec: