What is the current state of the law on habeas corpus in Canada?

Habeas corpus by its nature must adapt and evolve but the adaptation and evolution of the remedy must respect the goals and purpose of the writ. The expansion of its scope to include the protection of the rights of incarcerated persons is an example of that. The right to seek that relief was not always available to prisoners challenging internal disciplinary decisions. At common law a person convicted of a felony and sentenced to prison was considered to be without rights. That was why Canadian courts refused to review the decisions of prison officials. That changed in 1980 with the decision in Martineau v. Matsqui Institution, 1979 CanLII 184 (SCC), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 602 in which Justice Dickson, as he then was, said that elementary protection was required when a person was deprived of his liberty by being placed in a “prison within a prison”.