 | This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's work-in-progress page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable. For guidance on developing this draft, see Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Riel v The Queen | |
|---|---|
 Louis Riel, Métis leader 1844 - 1885 | |
| Court | Judicial Committee of the Privy Council |
| Full case name | Louis Riel v The Queen |
| Decided | October 22, 1885 |
| Citations | [1885] UKPC 37, 10 App. Cas. 657 |
| Case history | |
| Prior actions | (1) Trial of Louis Riel, Regina, North-West Territories (2) Appeal dismissed, Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench in banc |
| Appealed from | The Queen v Riel (No. 2) (1885), 1 Terr LR 23, 2 Man R 321 |
| Subsequent actions | Execution of Louis Riel, November 16, 1885, Regina, North-West Territories |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | |
| Case opinions | |
| Leave to appeal denied | |
| Decision by | Lord Halsbury |
| Laws applied | |
| Constitution Act, 1871 | |
| Keywords | |
| Constitutional law; federal jurisdiction over the North-West Territories; Peace, order and good government; jury trials | |
Riel v The Queen is a Canadian constitutional law decision by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1885, at that time the highest court of appeal for the British Empire, including Canada. The constitutional issue was the power of the federal Parliament to legislate for federal territories under the British North America Act, 1871 (now the Constitution Act, 1871).
Louis Riel had been convicted of the capital offence of high treason for his role in the North-West Rebellion of 1885. His trial had been held before a stipendiary magistrate and a justice of the peace, sitting with a jury of six jurors, in Regina, North-West Territories. On appeal, first to the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench and then to the Judicial Committee, Riel's counsel argued that the federal Parliament could not change the law to allow for trials on a capital offence by a stipendiary magistrate and six jurors instead of a superior court judge and the twelve jurors needed under English common law.
The Judicial Committee rejected Riel's application for leave to appeal from his conviction, effectively upholding his conviction and death sentence. It held that the Act gave the federal Parliament general legislative powers with respect to the territories, and Parliament could use that power to create judicial systems that varied from those used in England. The Judicial Committee decision was one of the earliest cases interpreting the scope of the federal Parliament's powers over federal territories under the Constitution Act, 1871.
Another issue, raised only on the initial appeal to the Manitoba Queen's Bench, was whether Riel should have been found not guilty by reason of insanity under the M'Naghten rules. The Queen's Bench held that he had not met the test for insanity.
Riel was hanged in Regina, North-West Territories, on November 16, 1885.
Facts of the case
editThe North-West Rebellion occurred in the winter and spring of 1885, in the North-West Territories. Louis Riel, who had led the Métis population in the Red River Rebellion fifteen years earlier, returned to Canada from the United States, where he had been in exile since 1875. Upon his return, he became one of the leaders of the Métis in the North-West Territories. Their grievances included land security and lack of democratic institutions in the Territories.[1] Initial discussions with representatives of the territorial and federal governments did not lead to a resolution, and eventually the Métis and some First Nations took up arms. The Canadian government sent troops west, which culminated in the Battle of Batoche, where the Métis forces were defeated in mid-May, 1885.
Trial
edit_MIKAN_3192595.jpg)
Following the defeat at Batoche, Riel surrendered himself to the government forces on May 15, 1885. Riel was then taken to Regina, the capital of the North-West Territories, where he was charged with six counts of high treason. He was tried by a stipendiary magistrate and a justice of the peace, sitting with a jury of six jurors. Defence counsel contested the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case, arguing that a stipendiary magistrate could not be given jurisdiction to hear capital crimes. They also contested the statutory provision for a six member jury, arguing that the English common law, in force in the North-West Territories, required a jury of twelve. The stipendiary magistrate rejected these arguments and held that he had jurisdiction to try the case with a jury of six.
Another point in issue was Riel’s mental state. There was some evidence that he suffered from what in those days was called "religious megalomania", now more likely to be classified as a form of paranoia. Riel insisted that he was not insane, but his defence counsel led evidence to put his mental state in doubt. In his charge to the jury, the stipendiary magistrate instructed them in the M'Naghten rules for determining if an accused could be found not guilty by reason of insanity.
On August 1, 1885, the jury convicted Riel with a recommendation of mercy. The stipendiary magistrate imposed the mandatory death sentence.
Appeals
editManitoba Queen's Bench
editRiel's first appeal was to the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, at that time the appeals court for the North-West Territories. A preliminary point was whether Riel was entitled to be present in person at the appeal. On September 2, 1885, the court held that as a Manitoba court, it did not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus to the authorities in the North-West Territories ordering them to bring Riel to Manitoba. The Court was also satisfied that the stipendiary magistrate had provided the court with certified copies of the record of the trial, and the appeal could proceed on those certified copies.[2]
The appeal was heard by three judges of the Court, sitting in banc: Chief Justice Lewis Wallbridge and Justices Thomas Wardlaw Taylor and Albert Clements Killam. Counsel for Riel were J. S. Ewart, QC, François-Xavier Lemieux and Charles Fitzpatrick. Crown counsel were Christopher Robinson QC, Britton Bath Osler, QC, and J.A.M. Akins, QC.[3]
The court gave its decision on September 9, 1885. It unanimously dismissed Riel's appeal, with each judge giving reasons.
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
edit
Riel then applied for leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, bypassing the Supreme Court of Canada . At that time the Judicial Committee was the highest court of appeal in the British Empire, including Canada.[4]
The Judicial Committee heard the application for leave on ###, 1885 and gave its decision on October 22, 1885. The Committee denied the application for leave to appeal. The decision was given by the Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Halsbury. As was the practice of the Judicial Committee at that time, there were no dissenting reasons from other members of the committee.[5][6]
Significance of the decision
editReferences
edit- ^ Lewis H. Thomas, "Riel, Louis", Dictionary of Canadian Biography.
- ^ The Queen v Riel (No. 1) (1885), 2 Man R 302, 1885 CanLII 158 (MB QB).
- ^ The Queen v Riel (No. 2) (1885), 2 Man R 321, 1 Terr LR 23, 1885 CanLII 88] (MB QB).
- ^ James G. Snell and Frederick Vaughan, The Supreme Court of Canada: History of the Institution (Toronto: Osgoode Society, 1985), pp. 4–9, 42.
- ^ Peter Hogg and Wade Wright, Constitutional Law of Canada, 5th ed., supplemented (Toronto: Thomson Reuters, looseleaf current to 2023), para. 8:2.
- ^ P.A. Howell, The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council 1833–1876: Its Origins, Structure and Development (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 221–222.