Constitution Act, 1982

[2][3] The proclamation confirmed that Canada had formally assumed authority over its constitution, the final step to full sovereignty.

[citation needed] The Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords were designed to secure approval from Quebec, but both efforts failed to do so.

However, the Bill of Rights was only a federal statute and was limited in its effectiveness because it is not directly applicable to provincial laws.

However, section 24 of the Charter granted new powers to the courts to enforce more creative remedies and to exclude improperly obtained evidence in criminal trials.

These powers are greater than what was typical under the common law and under the principle of Parliamentary supremacy, which Canada had inherited from the United Kingdom.

[e][11] Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 "recognizes and affirms" the "existing" aboriginal and treaty rights in Canada.

As a result, by entering into land claims agreements, the government of Canada and members of an aboriginal people can establish new treaty rights, which are constitutionally recognized and affirmed.

Writing in 1982, Professor Peter Hogg expressed scepticism as to whether the courts could interpret and enforce this provision, noting its "political and moral, rather than legal" character.

These five formulas are: Neither aboriginal peoples' or the territories' agreement is required to make a constitutional amendment, even if it affects their interests.

The new provisions, section 92A and the Sixth Schedule, gave the provinces exclusive jurisdiction to regulate the development of non-renewable natural resources and electrical generation.

Although there was no express provision giving the courts the power to decide that a Canadian law violated the BNA Act and was therefore inoperative, this power was implicit in s. 2 of the Colonial Laws Validity Act, which established the priority of statutes to be applied by the courts.

The Canadian courts have reserved the right to add and entrench principles and conventions into the Constitution unilaterally.

[citation needed] In particular, in New Brunswick Broadcasting Co v Nova Scotia (Speaker of the House of Assembly), the Supreme Court of Canada said that s. 52(2) was not an exhaustive listing of all that comprised the Constitution.

To address this problem, section 55 requires that the federal Minister of Justice prepare "a French version of the…Constitution of Canada as expeditiously as possible."

[citation needed] Section 55 also requires that "when any portion thereof sufficient to warrant action being taken has been so prepared, it shall but put forward for enactment by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada pursuant to the procedure then applicable to an amendment of the same provisions of the Constitution of Canada."

The reference to a proclamation by the Governor-General implies that some combination of the general, unanimity and special arrangements procedures would be required to enact the French version.

[citation needed] Although the intention was presumably that the government of Canada would do so by introducing an amendment resolution in the House of Commons,[citation needed] a Senator or a provincial government could presumably do so since, under section 46, such amendments "may be initiated either by the Senate or the House of Commons or by the legislative assembly of a province".

The Australian High Court subsequently recognized that the Act established Australia as an independent country, making Britain a foreign power.