What are the principles of fundamental justice in Canada?

The principles of fundamental justice are the basic legal tenets that govern the relationship between the state and the individual in Canada. They are protected by section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the right to life, liberty, and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. The Supreme Court of Canada has identified the principles through more than four decades of section 7 jurisprudence.

The Reference re Section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (British Columbia) (1985) was the first major section 7 decision and confirmed that fundamental justice has both procedural and substantive content. Procedural fundamental justice includes the right to a fair hearing, the right to know the case to be met, the right to make full answer and defence, the right to an impartial decision-maker, and the right to a reasoned decision. Substantive fundamental justice includes the requirement that laws not be arbitrary, vague, overbroad, or grossly disproportionate, the principle of legality (laws must be knowable in advance), the principle that the state must prove fault before punishing serious offences, and the protection of vulnerable persons.

Specific principles identified by the Supreme Court include: presumption of innocence (Reference re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act, 1985); right to silence (R. v. Hebert, 1990); fundamental fairness in criminal sentencing (R. v. Vaillancourt, 1987); protection against self-incrimination (R. v. P. (M.B.), 1994); non-arbitrariness (Rodriguez v. British Columbia, 1993); non-overbreadth (R. v. Heywood, 1994); non-gross-disproportionality (R. v. Malmo-Levine, 2003); proportionality in extradition (United States v. Burns, 2001); the best interests of the child (Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada, 2004); and the protection of individuals from state action that endangers life or security of the person (Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013).

The principles of fundamental justice are distinct from the narrower common-law concept of natural justice (which protects fairness in administrative tribunals through the rule against bias and the right to be heard). Natural justice continues to operate in Canadian administrative law alongside section 7 of the Charter, with the leading administrative-law case being Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (1999). Section 7 has been used to challenge laws across many areas including criminal law, immigration and refugee law, child-welfare law, prostitution law (Canada v. Bedford, 2013), and end-of-life law (Carter v. Canada, 2015). The principles continue to develop as new constitutional questions reach the Supreme Court.