Return to search

A conversation among equals : courts, legislatures and the notwithstanding clause

Dialogue between courts and legislatures can occur where legislatures reverse, modify or avoid judicial decisions. With two exceptions, however, legislatures have only reversed the Supreme Court on three occasions. Defiant legislative responses enacted without the notwithstanding clause undermine the Charter and the courts, and are an inappropriate means of expressing institutional disagreement. However, based on a model of coordinate constitutionalism, recourse to the override constitutes a legitimate means for legislatures to advance alternate interpretations of Charter rights. Furthermore, section 33's value lies in the opportunity it creates for public deliberation regarding issues of national importance. Its relative disuse can be attributed to a combination of factors including its legislative history, the influence of American constitutionalism and an executive-dominated parliamentary process. Recognizing the legitimacy of section 33 would contribute to a greater respect for the roles and responsibilities of all three branches of government under a system of constitutional supremacy.

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:LACETR/oai:collectionscanada.gc.ca:QMM.112336
Date January 2008
CreatorsForrest, Christopher.
PublisherMcGill University
Source SetsLibrary and Archives Canada ETDs Repository / Centre d'archives des thèses électroniques de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada
LanguageEnglish
Detected LanguageEnglish
TypeElectronic Thesis or Dissertation
Formatapplication/pdf
CoverageMaster of Arts (Department of Political Science.)
RightsAll items in eScholarship@McGill are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.
Relationalephsysno: 002769220, proquestno: AAIMR51374, Theses scanned by UMI/ProQuest.

Page generated in 0.0019 seconds