IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v36yi4p541-564.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Seceding The Canadian Way

Author

Listed:
  • Hilliard Aronovitch

Abstract

The Canadian Supreme Court's 1998 decision on whether Quebec has a right to secede was initially lauded for granting both the federal government and secessionists their due. The Court found there to be an implicit Constitutional right for Quebec to secede, but by negotiation of the terms, not one-sided action. It thus deemed secession both a legal and a political phenomenon. This paper critically reassesses the decision in light especially of recent discussions about constitutionalizing secession. It argues that while a right to “nonunilateral” secession is warranted on general moral-political grounds, it should not be encoded or interpreted as a constitutional right, nor should it be called upon except to avoid systematic injustice. Copyright , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Hilliard Aronovitch, 0. "Seceding The Canadian Way," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 36(4), pages 541-564.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:36:y::i:4:p:541-564
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pjl007
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lluís Pérez-Lozano, 2021. "An Imperfect Firewall: Quebec’s Constitutional Right of Secession as a Device Against Domination," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 475-482.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:36:y::i:4:p:541-564. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.