Why this article is proposed
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not protect property. Property and civil rights in the province are exclusively provincial under Constitution Act, 1867 s.92(13). The article would entrench property rights, economic liberty, contract protection, and rural and resource interests in a provincial constitution, where they would be harder to roll back by ordinary legislation.
What it would change
Section 1 entrenches a right to acquire, own, use, develop, and transfer property, with compensation required for any deprivation. Section 2 broadens the regulatory-takings doctrine beyond current Canadian common law. Section 3 creates a right to engage in lawful work, with licensing restricted to public-health, public-safety, and integrity grounds. Section 4 protects contracts against legislative, executive, and judicial impairment, subject to a compelling-public-purpose standard. Section 5 entrenches rural, agricultural, and resource interests against disproportionate burden.
The legal basis
Property and civil rights in the province are squarely within Alberta's jurisdiction. Constitution Act, 1982 s.45 lets Alberta entrench these protections. Several federal heads of power overlap: trade and commerce (s.91(2)), banking (s.91(15)), bills of exchange (s.91(18)), bankruptcy (s.91(21)), and criminal law (s.91(27), including theft and fraud). The provincial constitution cannot displace federal jurisdiction over those subjects. The interprovincial trade rule in s.121 also continues to apply.
Open questions
Three questions for Albertans: whether to entrench the broader regulatory-takings standard in Section 2, knowing that it will generate litigation about what counts as a substantial deprivation; whether to entrench economic liberty as a stand-alone right, given how widely it could be invoked against routine occupational regulation; and how to phrase the rural and resource protections in Section 5 so that they respect Indigenous rights under Constitution Act, 1982 s.35 and environmental obligations under federal law.
Question 9 on the October 2026 referendum ballot asks whether provincial laws should have priority over federal laws in areas of provincial or shared jurisdiction. That question is about paramountcy and is addressed in Article IV s6.