Wednesday, 8 January 2014

GINS Post #5





The Geography of Hope explores many places where sustainability and sustainable solutions is being applied. When comparing all the places, I had the greatest interest in learning more about Denmark. 

For this post, we were asked to connect the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to our specific country that we were researching. 





Denmark has a political system somewhat like Canada. Running on a parliamentary representative democracy, Denmark is a constitutional monarchy. The framework of politics is reflected in the Constitutional Act of Denmark. Due to Denmark running on a constitutional monarchy, the Constitutional Act is very similar to that of Canada but different in the sense that it is based on monarchy.


The Constitutional Act of Denmark was adopted on 5 June 1849 and was amended most recently in 1953. The rights and freedoms is very similar to Canada’s. Freedoms such as, freedoms of speech, expression, religion etc. is all listed in the Constitution. When comparing the Constitution to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Denmark’s fundamental, legal, equality and mobility rights are that of Canada’s but when it comes to the democratic rights, it is different. Having a royal head of state, the Constitution focuses strictly on monarchy. For example, “Legislative authority shall be vested in the King and the Folketing conjointly. Executive authority shall be vested in the King. Judicial authority shall be vested in the courts of justice.” - Under Part 1, §3.

The issue that was represented in The Geography of Hope was sustainability and climate change/global warming. When a bill is passed about sustainable development, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms doesn't play a role. Even though this is the case, freedom of expression and speech must be in place. If a country is run by a single leader (North Korea) and that leader is in supreme power, bills such as these might not pass. With a democratic approach in the political framework and a legislative assembly, everyones opinions effect the final decision that will be made. If the Canadian Charter or Rights and Freedoms was in place in Denmark, the issue presented in our novel might have resulted in a different approach of looking at things but all in all, the bill of sustainable development was most likely still going to be passed. Because places in Canada such as Calgary are already are investing in sustainable development (Wind Energy powered C-train), if the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was in place in Denmark, this wouldn't of changed.


Thanks for reading!


Sources:


http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/fcurta/VIKING.html


http://www.humanrights.dk/human+rights/denmark+and+human+rights/the+constitutional+act+of+denmark


http://denmark.dk/en/society/government-and-politics/


http://www.stm.dk/_p_10992.html

2 comments:

  1. Hi Sanchit. You definitely talked about how different Denmark's constitution differs from the Canadian one, even though Canada is a constitutional monarchy. The Queen can still make a decision for Canada, but she is basically a figurehead since Canada practically runs under its own system now. And also, in a dictatorship, there still is a council that advises the dictator (Kim Jong-Un) on what to do, since the pressure and skills required in running a country is immense. In a constitutional monarchy, the main decider in the passing of a bill is usually the monarch(s) (although in Canada it's put to a vote). How else do you think the Canadian charter would affect Denmark?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I nominate YOU for the Liebster Blog Award! Check it out: http://cssjp6.blogspot.ca/2014/01/liebster-blog-award.html

    ReplyDelete