R V. Keegstra Case Analysis

The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court in Canada, and the final court of appeal in the Canadian justice system; therefore, the Supreme Court of Canada decisions are the ultimate expression and application of Canadian law (Supreme Court of Canada tour). The landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in the R v. Keegstra case regarding the freedom of expression portrays the theoretical concepts behind the court’s rulings, as it is the job of the court to deliver a fair decision to the parties involved, as well as a decision which maintains law and order in society. The R v. Keegstra ruling contains insights from the consensus theory, as the decision of the court was in the interest of the public. In order to understand a criminal …show more content…
Keegstra case suggests that the criminal code is a reflection of society’s consensus about what is and is not criminal, which is the perspective of the consensus theory (Morden and Palys, 2015: 76). In order to be logical and to be able to meet the basic rules of critical thinking, a theory must go through a test and should offer a simple explanation of reality (Boyd, Cartwright and Heidt, 2015: 120). According to the consensus theory, society functions through social bonds and collective beliefs, and is characterized by widespread acceptance of values, norms, and laws (Morden and Palys, 2015: 76). Hence, the criminal code reflects the social values in Canada as it aims to protect Canadians from actions that are deemed criminal through the consensus of society. That being the case, the consensus theory succeeds in supporting criminal law as its simple explanation provides a direct link to the purpose and function of criminal …show more content…
Keegstra, Keegstra was promoting hatred against Jewish people, which showcased that Keegstra does not share the same values or beliefs as others in his community. According to Durkheim, Keegstra was deviant as he attacked the Jewish segment of society, which is not acceptable under functionalism as society functions with all its interrelated components and cannot be broken down into different segments as the structure would collapse. More importantly, Durkheim emphasized the importance of the “forces of integration” and the “forces of regulation” as they are both crucial to the cohesiveness and smooth functioning of society (Cartwright, 2015: 273). When Keegstra promoted hate against Jewish people, he attacked social bonds and the shared beliefs, which could have led to the failure of society’s integration and the overall well-being of society. Therefore, laws and social institutions had to step in and stop him. In this case, it was the criminal code and the Supreme Court of Canada which ensured his compliance with social norms, values, and beliefs (Cartwright, 2015: 274). Therefore, Keegstra’s conviction by the Supreme Court of Canada was legitimate as he deserved the punishment for acting in an unacceptable manner against society’s

Show More

Related Documents: R V. Keegstra Case Analysis

R. V. Keegstra : in Support of the Dissent Essay