Constitutional Dimensions of Northern Food Security

Saturday November 14, 2026, 1:00pm-2:30pm, Room W104

This panel brings together emerging and experienced scholars, litigators, and advocates to examine a significant unresolved question in Canadian constitutional law: under what circumstances might section 7 of the Canadian Charter impose positive obligations on the state? While the Supreme Court of Canada in Gosselin v Quebec (Attorney General) declined to recognize a positive rights claim, the Court notably left open the possibility that “special circumstances” could one day justify such protection. More recently, cases such as La Rose v Canada have reignited debate surrounding the scope of section 7 and the role of courts in responding to systemic harms.

This panel will explore how lessons from previous public interest litigation may inform future claims seeking recognition of positive rights obligations. Particular attention will be paid to legal strategy, evidentiary burdens, framing techniques, and advocacy approaches that have either strengthened or weakened these arguments before Canadian courts. The discussion will also examine how the Nutrition North Canada program intersects with Indigenous food insecurity and northern access to essential services, raising broader questions about state responsibility, inequality, and substantive access to basic necessities.

Through an interdisciplinary discussion, the session will critically assess whether issues such as climate change, food insecurity, and systemic inequities may constitute the “special circumstances” contemplated in Gosselin, and what this could mean for advancing the right to food and broader state accountability in Canada.

Speakers:

Ashoke Mohanraj, Metcalf & Company

Camille Cameron, Schulich School of Law

Raymond Johnson-Brown, McGill Faculty of Law