Hi Cairo,
[passive] I take you comments as well intentioned. [/agressive]
However, if I could be allowed a point of clarification:
Quote:
In a Constitutional Republic like the U.S.,
we have, obviously, our Constitution and the
courts. One single official deciding privacy
is hardly Democratic....or free.
|
The Privacy Commissioner is not a single official deciding privacy. We also have our Constitution and courts. We also have this Privacy Commmissioner, who is an additional ombudsman with a focus on privacy issues from the perspective of the individual.
He is a voice for the people on privacy issues and has standing to bring action in the federal courts against the government for challenges to behaviour that might be unconstitutional.
I guess in the USA there is the ACLU, which might support a suit by an individual or class. But that doesn't indicate a commitment of the legislature to advocate privacy rights of the individual as a matter of governmental policy, as well as a Constitutional right. I'm not saying the American system is wrong, in this regard. I do understand the separation of the branches of government and checks and balances.
It's good to have discussion of comparative democracies, rather than everyone starting and ending with the premise that the system they were born in is the be all and end all. I'm not evangelical about the Canadian political system. I see aspects that work and many that don't. Likewise, from my limited understanding of the political system in the USA, there is much to be emulated and some things that are less appealing to me.
I'm not arguing a case for one way over the other. Just exploring the differences and discussing points in common and of distinction.
Philosophically, I think that if both our democracies could get a free "constitutional do-over" there might be aspects of each system that are worth keeping for the next hundred years, and others which might be culled and left behind as anachronistic. We don't have to agree on what those are, but it's fun and enlightening to discuss on the merits. I'd abolish the Canadian Senate in a "regulated" heartbeat, if you get my meaning. Could you accept the notion of representation by population? What's with that electoral college that recommends to the Supreme Court which decides who should be President? That might be tweaked!
This thread seemed to me to be a good place to raise one point of difference: that Canada has Radwanski and the USA has Poindexter. On that small point, I'm happy with the Canadian approach to taking care of the privacy of the individual.