We’re back with another episode from The Bellwether! This is Part 1 of a new series taking a closer look at Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, better known as the “notwithstanding clause.”
"... I think that it's becoming increasingly clear that Section 33 is a bad idea ..."
In fact, I - very disrespectfully - disagree with that statement.
The judges in this country have twisted and expanded "rights" in ways never imagined by the signatories to the patriation of the constitution. This judge made law is not in any way subject to review or control - except by the use of the NWC. If a legislature uses this option capriciously or in any way not seen as acceptable by the voting public then it will suffer the consequences at the voting booth.
To not have the NWC means that we have a "legislature" i.e. the courts which are appointed and which are not subject to the citizens of the land. As it stands now, the NWC is a safeguard. To remove it - or to neuter it as the current Justice Minister is attempting to do - is unacceptable.
"... I think that it's becoming increasingly clear that Section 33 is a bad idea ..."
In fact, I - very disrespectfully - disagree with that statement.
The judges in this country have twisted and expanded "rights" in ways never imagined by the signatories to the patriation of the constitution. This judge made law is not in any way subject to review or control - except by the use of the NWC. If a legislature uses this option capriciously or in any way not seen as acceptable by the voting public then it will suffer the consequences at the voting booth.
To not have the NWC means that we have a "legislature" i.e. the courts which are appointed and which are not subject to the citizens of the land. As it stands now, the NWC is a safeguard. To remove it - or to neuter it as the current Justice Minister is attempting to do - is unacceptable.