Speaking of a “frontal attack”, Prime Minister François Legault strongly condemned on Saturday the remarks of his federal counterpart Justin Trudeau, who is seriously considering the idea of addressing the Supreme Court to further regulate the use of waiver provision.
“This will expressed by Justin Trudeau is a frontal attack on the ability of our nation to protect our collective rights,” hammered Mr. Legault in a reaction published on his social networks on Saturday morning.
He was reacting to an exclusive interview with The Press Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who said he wanted to further regulate the use of the notwithstanding clause by governments like those of Quebec and Ontario, which have used it in recent years.
“We are trivializing the suspension of fundamental rights”, worried in particular Mr. Trudeau, admitting that he is also seriously considering the idea of submitting a reference to the Supreme Court of Canada on this delicate question. .
Sometimes called the “notwithstanding clause”, the notwithstanding clause gives the power to the government invoking it to exempt a law from any legal remedy for a period of five years, even if this law violates certain rights guaranteed by the Charter.
According to the head of the Canadian government, a deep reflection is required on the use of this provision, which is certainly enshrined in the Constitution, but which must remain according to him “a tool of very last resort”. Mr. Trudeau regrets that the use of the notwithstanding clause has become almost commonplace, a trend that worries him the most at a time when we are witnessing a rise in populism in certain regions of the world.
PHOTO HUGO-SÉBASTIEN AUBERT, THE PRESS
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau granted an interview to the Bureau Chief of The Press in Ottawa, Joël-Denis Bellavance, during a trip to UQTR.
“A reference to the Supreme Court of Canada can be made and I can tell you that our Minister of Justice, David Lametti, a former dean of the faculty of law at McGill University, a proud Quebecer, is thinking precisely about the avenues available to us on this, ”he persisted.
“Weaken the powers of the provinces”
For François Legault, however, the Canadian Prime Minister wants to “change the rules to weaken the powers of the provinces and Quebec”. “I remind you that no Quebec government has adhered to the 1982 Constitution, which does not recognize the Quebec nation. The governments of the Parti Québécois, the Liberal Party and the CAQ have all used the derogatory clause, in particular to protect the French language, “was further justified by the CAQ leader.
“The protection of individual rights is important, but it should not be set up as an absolute dogma as Justin Trudeau does. It is up to the National Assembly to decide on the laws that govern us as a nation,” insisted Mr. Legault.
In his publication, François Legault even invites Justin Trudeau to “meditate” on the words of his father, former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, which he had made about the notwithstanding clause in the early 1980s, when the adoption of it.
“I don’t really fear the notwithstanding clause. It can be abused like anything, but it suffices to refer to the Canadian Bill of Rights adopted by Diefenbaker in 1960; it includes a derogatory clause which caused no great scandal. […] It is a way for the federal and provincial legislative assemblies to guarantee that it is the elected representatives of the people rather than the courts who have the last word, ”explained Pierre Elliot Trudeau at the time.
Ultimately, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau wants to “attack democracy and the people of Quebec as a whole”, denounces François Legault again. “Quebec will never accept such a weakening of its rights. Never,” he concludes.
On Twitter, the Quebec Minister of Democratic Institutions, Jean-François Roberge, gave a layer. “Justin Trudeau is going too far. He wants to use the Supreme Court to serve his personal ideology. In Quebec, we exist as a nation, as a distinct society,” he pleaded, adding that the protection of individual rights should not “be set up as an absolute dogma.”
With Joel-Denis Bellavance, The Press