3 ms·

In democracies, what is not forbidden IS permitted. Also, many democratic counties explicitly state the right to a “peaceful assembly”

• OJFord 5y ago
  That is generally true, but I think nothing to do with democracy per se? It's just more practical to black-list behaviours than white-list them isn't it?
• landemva 5y ago
  What you describe, right to act if not explicitly prohibited, is usually associated with a constitution. The constitution crystallizes the structure. A democracy is the larger group voting to take whatever they want from the smaller group. Some democracies are constrained in what they can take by a constitution, and others not so much.
  • lowkey 5y ago
    In the case of Canada, the right to freedom of assembly is enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is the highest law of the land and supercedes all other laws and acts, even the Emergencies Act, which by law must conform to the charter. That is why despite claims by the government and the police that these protests or occupations are unlawful, no one - not a single person has been charge with protesting illegally. The most the police could do was charge the leaders with mischief. Instead of charging the protesters, the police have been rounding them up, driving around in circles, and then letting them go free. This is not because the police are being kind. It is because they don’t want to risk a court challenge of charter violations which would set a dangerous precedent that would risk the future credibility of the government and the police in similar situations.
    • landemva 5y ago
      Is there a form of declaratory judgment in the courts? To get controversy settled.