Quebec’s National Assembly building. An upcoming Supreme Court of Canada case involves Quebec’s use of the notwithstanding clause. BRUNSWICK NEWSArticle contentIn the midst of the American government’s turmoil, which, among other things, almost makes a point of flouting protections in the law, there are alarming echoes to be found in Canada.THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY.Subscribe now to access this story and more:Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsSUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES.Subscribe or sign in to your account to continue your reading experience.Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsRegister to unlock more articles.Create an account or sign in to continue your reading experience.Access additional stories every monthShare your thoughts and join the conversation in our commenting communityGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an AccountorArticle contentHere in Nova Scotia, our own premier recently signed on to an attempt to further erode fundamental charter rights.Article contentArticle contentA move to expand the effect of the notwithstanding clause of the Constitution by several conservative premiers will serve to undermine our fundamental human rights. Surprisingly, it has attracted no media coverage here and, unsurprisingly, no public discussion.Article contentArticle contentEven though it has slipped off the news radar, this disturbing initiative deserves a few moments’ reflection for what it reveals about our premier placing a low value on Nova Scotians’ fundamental rights.Article contentWhat’s the fuss about?Article contentLast month, Premier Tim Houston, along with a minority of Canadian premiers, signed an open letter that called on the federal government to withdraw its written submissions in an upcoming Supreme Court of Canada case involving Quebec’s use of the notwithstanding clause.Article contentWhat had the federal government written in its submissions to the Supreme Court regarding the charter that was so troubling to Houston that he demanded the federal government withdraw its written argument?Article contentIn fact, the Canadian government did not take sides in the “secularism” debate and the right to “freedom of religion” now before the Supreme Court of Canada.Article contentArticle contentNo, it argued simply that people in Canada should still be permitted to ask a court to declare that a law is in violation of the charter even where a government passes a law to have it operate despite it offending a charter right — as permitted under Section 33 of the Constitution.Article contentIn short, the federal government is simply arguing that the court’s traditional role of making determinations about whether laws violate rights should continue even though the provincial law would still remain in force as a result of Section 33, the notwithstanding clause.Article contentIs this all too abstract?Article contentWell, what about this. By his open letter (which, interestingly, nowhere appeared on the province’s website), Houston wants to preserve to his government the possibility of enacting overrides to charter rights without anybody being able to seek a court’s opinion on the constitutionality of such laws.
Opinion: Rights override effort flies under the radar
