somecanuckchick
maya_b 🇨🇦always thought it was in case the federal gov't tried to go all maga-esque - not the other way 'round
@maya_b The Charter is a living document... court challenges are all we have.
@maya_b The Charter is vague enough and specific enough when and where it matters... and the SCoC will decide the rest of the shite. I'm OK w/ that to a point... Alberta and QC have entirely misused/abused it.
yea. sigh.
at least it's mostly written out.
in the UK there's no written document so arguments about what the British constitution is (based on oral mutable history), are generally absurd.
Come On Giant Asteroid!Alternate idea: The notwithstanding clause should not exist.
You can't have a "unless we don't feel like it" clause in what is supposed to be your society's basic law.
@VE2UWY We'd have to reopen the constitution to get rid of it. Every province would want to have something else instead, or some other BS. Not gonna happen. The only way to deal with those who use it, is run it up the flagpole to SCoC.
Orrr ... just abolish the Charter entirely since including the "notwithstanding" clause renders almost the whole document moot.
§32 lets the any parliament ignore sections 2 and 7-15.
§2(a) - Freedom of religion
§2(b) - Freedom of expression
§2(c) - Freedom of peaceful assembly
§2(d) - Freedom of association
The rest wouldn't fit here but these (+7-15) are basically the heart of the Charter & any parliament is free to ignore them.
Might as well ditch it.