Five premiers have asked Justice Minister Sean Fraser to withdraw Ottawa’s legal argument calling for restrictions on the use of the Constitution’s notwithstanding clause. According to Fraser, it would be “unimaginable” for the federal government to avoid a case that will have long-lasting effects on Charter rights. He said that the argument between the premiers is “untenable.” Wednesday morning, the minister, who is also the attorney general, told reporters that this should be decided by the courts, not by political debate and pressure. According to Fraser, “the interplay of the notwithstanding clause, vis-à-vis the rights and freedoms that the Charter guarantees to all Canadians, is something that will be of national importance and will have lasting impacts.” “It is unimaginable that a federal government would not intervene to share its perspective on the meaning of the Charter,” the author writes. “Especially at a time when the independence of courts is being questioned and democracies are being put under more and more strain in Canada and around the world.” We will vigorously defend the Charter and the rule of law, and thankfully, the court will make the decisions, not a federal or provincial government. The federal government argues that the Constitution’s notwithstanding clause should prevent it from being used to wipe out rights guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in a filing that was submitted last month to the Supreme Court of Canada in a case involving Quebec’s secularism law. The notwithstanding clause allows provincial legislatures or Parliament to pass legislation that effectively overrides provisions of the Charter for a period of five years. The premiers of Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia wrote a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney on Tuesday urging the federal government to withdraw its court submission because it amounts to a “complete disavowal of the constitutional bargain that brought the Charter into being.” The premiers say that Ottawa’s argument could break up the nation. According to the letter, “The federal government’s position amounts to a direct attack on the foundational constitutional principles of federalism and democracy.” However, Fraser stated that Canada should exercise “very careful” safeguards against rights erosion. He stated that “some future government who is empowered by an erosion of our rights today” will bring about Canada’s possible “future downfall as a nation, should it ever come” rather than invasion. “We will have no one but ourselves to blame if we are not very careful, and we are going to see, bit by bit, the rights that we enjoy as Canadians will come to cease to exist.” During question time on Wednesday, Bloc Québécois MP Rhéal Fortin referred to Ottawa’s intervention as a “constitutional power play.” He asserted that the premiers are opposing a federal government that is attempting to employ the courts as a “weapon” in its “fight against the notwithstanding clause.” Fortin also demanded that Fraser retract his “insulting” analogy regarding the erosion of human rights in other parts of the world, specifically in reference to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Fraser retaliated by asserting that Fortin was purposefully misinterpreting his remarks to support a “weak” political position. He stated that the “healthy way, in a democracy, to challenge ideas you may not like” is for the provinces to challenge Ottawa’s legal position in court. Last month, Ontario Premier Doug Ford told reporters that Carney’s court intervention was “the worst decision” he had ever made. Ford stated that unelected judges should not impede elected provincial legislatures.
Canada’s justice minister rules out withdrawing legal submission on notwithstanding clause
