offers a crown to the Supreme Court in the role of Julius Caesar.
It's a small mercy that Louise Arbour is no longer on the Supreme Court of Canada.
Arbour urges courts to protect rights of poor
Arbour wishes to 'launch a debate' as to whether (or when and how in her way of thinking) the court will surplant the democratically elected government. She states that the 'Charter is full of promise' - meaning it promises to allow the Supreme Court to attain supreme power in lieu of Parliament.
Arbour conveniently forgets the place for debate is in the electoral realm - during campaigns and within Parliament. Canadian continually debate the basic balance over the fine line between providing a social safety net vs. a welfare trap 'hammock' that removes the incentive for people to do something useful with their lives. We debate this in some form in every election and budget - federal, provincial and municipal.
If Arbour is interested in this question, she should run for office - elected office that is.
Since she is so keen on wondering about definitions, she might consider the following:
The act of organising or encouraging efforts to subvert or overthrow the Government. (http://eureka.imagineering.com.au/glossary.htm)
In my view, Arbour's statements as reported:
Canadian litigants and Canadian courts, including her ex-colleagues at the Supreme Court, to be less "timid" in tackling head on "claims emerging from the right to be free from want."
demonstrates seditious intention in usurping the role of Parliament. She is encouraging her former colleagues to govern in place of Parliament.