I really can’t believe it’s been 40 years since Her Majesty signed the Proclamation on a rainy day on Parliament Hill, bringing the Constitution home and ending the remnants of British legislative powers over Canada. 
In typical Canadian fashion, it’s not a holiday or anything. Just a few politics and law geeks notice it. 
It is an impressive document and very significant accomplishment. More people should understand it. I do not think we ever learned anything at all about it in school. I have only looked into it over the last few years and it balances some very complex considerations.
It’ll be better celebrated in 10 more years. Also it probably is downplayed due to Quebec not signing on and the failures of the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords.
It’s really a story with an open chapter… a political hot potato. Not burning hot, but an equation that needs to be squared (in a future safer time). So far everyone is happy with its current function to not throw the country back into severe political crisis trying to hammer out an agreeable amendment. A third failed accord would be very bad for Canada.
Also, the Canadian Constitution, like most modern constitutions, has its charter of rights based on the UN’s UDHR.
Did anyone else know that 
?
No, because it’s not correct. Some of the Charter is based on the Canadian Bill of Rights, some is based on experience with court decisions on the Bill of Rights, a lot based on Canada’s history of English and French language rights, and several sections illustrate how the Charter is to be read with the pre-existing provisions of the Constitution.
Agree with @Northern_Piper . Today’s Charter takes into account a lot of prior Canadian statutes and jurisprudence, and Canadian history.
Wasn’t it ten years ago, @Northern_Piper , on the Charter’s 30th anniversary, that you and I and @Muffin hosted an “Ask Us Anything” about the Charter?
Quite so. Here it is:
Time flies when you’re having fun!
Is that what we’ve been doing these last ten years?
I know that the 1982 constitution uses a little bit of the language from the UDHR. Read them both, and decide for yourself .
But you’re right too. It is a beautiful amalgam of all pertinent documents to date. Just beautiful .
Here, I’ll even make it easy for you to compare: the UDHR and the Canadian Charter of Rights
EDIT: For example, Freedom of thought and Freedom of Association. Where on earth is that found in English common law or the US bill of rights? They obviously got that from the UN UDHR
Seems to be scattered quite liberally in the US Constitution.
@BippityBoppityBoo Relevant Amendment: * Amendment I*
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I certainly see no mention of right to associate there 
There’s a right to peaceably assemble. But you do realize that is not, at least literally, a right to associate. Freedom of thought is not mentioned either. If you find it (in the actual text of the US Constitution, I mean ) QUOTE IT to us
I agree the SCOTUS has added more rights over the years. And they probably were right to do so. But sadly, as justices retire, even that may change.
EDIT: I now see that was evident in your cite. Well, it’s still not literally in the US Constitution. And where is it, in English Common Law. (Remember too, Canada follows English common law, not American. Technically speaking, they have ignored us since 1776. At least formally.)
I liked this article.
Canada is its own country now, huh? Good for you guys. Maybe one day you’ll be good enough to be a 51st state. *ducks.
JK
It’s pretty unlikely that Canada will end up as “North Virginia” or even one of the important states. Countries invading Canada tend to get bogged down by harsh winters, deep mud, medieval French, annoying black flies and biting sarcasm.
I’m unsure what you mean here. I can parse a few meanings. Do you mean that English common law is binding in Canada? Do you mean that American common law is ignored in Canada?
Could you clarify?
We’re safe. Anybody taking over Canada would have to deal with Quebec, and no one wants that!
It’s more likely - though not very - that a few liberal, disgruntled northeastern states will ask for admission to Canada than it is for Canada to seek admission to the US.
If Poilievre wins, and he could, some Canadians will threaten to emigrate to the US! Of course, they won’t actually do that. Freedom!
I think we got something to commemorate it when I was in school. Maybe a certificate or a small Canadian flag pin?