Thread by @BenjaminABarnes

Dear Ontario. This issue is much bigger than how you feel about the change to Toronto''s council. Reasonable people can disagree on that. However, it really, really matters that your government is prepared to invoke the notwithstanding clause. (thread)

Your rights- YOUR RIGHTS - are guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canadians are justly proud of those guarantees. They protect you - yes, YOU PERSONALLY - against injustice.

The Courts interpret and apply your Charter rights and freedoms. When doing so, they already have a safety release valve to permit government action that infringes on YOUR rights - if that infringement can be shown to be a reasonable limit in a fair and democratic society.

So today's ruling has already concluded Ontarian's rights were violated and that the violation was not justified. The Ontario government is entirely free to appeal that decision - sometimes courts do get it wrong.

But what YOUR government has announced is that it will invoke an almost never used constitutional power to unilaterally decide to override YOUR rights. The whole point of the Charter is to protect YOU against decisions that infringe YOUR rights by your governments.

The use of the notwithstanding clause has always been politically toxic. Which is why you haven't seen it used (at least in English Canada) when governments make mistakes and infringe your rights. You don't think previous governments have disagreed when they lost Charter cases?

Of course they disagreed. But they also knew the damage to the fabric of Canadian society and the rule of law caused by frivolous use of this extreme power was worse than the court decision they disliked. They were correct.

Everyone - on all sides of the political spectrum - should be VERY upset and VERY angry about this announcement. Maybe you don't care much about the City of Toronto issue -or even agree with Ford about it . . .

Trust me, you will sure as hell care when a federal or provincial government decides it is time to override a constitutionally protected right that directly impacts you.

This is Canada's Pandora's Box. Tell your MPP to shut the damn lid and back away slowly.

So let's talk about which of your rights is vulnerable to use of the notwithstanding clause.

Section 2 - your fundamental freedoms to freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of belief, freedom of expression, freedom of the press and of other media of communication, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association - all vulnerable

Section 7 - "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice" is vulnerable to s. 33.

Section 8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure. Vulnerable to s. 33.

Section 9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned. Also vulnerable to s. 33.

s. 10 .Everyone has the right on arrest or detention
a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;
b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; . . .

s. 10 cont'd
. . .
and
c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful. All subject to s. 33 override.

s. 11 provides you with nine (9!!) rights against the state in criminal matters including minor things like the right to be presumed innocent. Yes, they are all subject to a s. 33 override.

s. 12 Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. - you got it - subject to s. 33

s. 13 A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence.

s. 14 A party or witness in any proceedings who does not understand or speak the language in which the proceedings are conducted or who is deaf has the right to the assistance of an interpreter.

s. 15 (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or. . .

. . . mental or physical disability.

Look at that list. Those are important rights that protect you and the people you love. Sure, you might disagree with a court interpretation of the Charter every now and then (I have) . . .

But has there EVER been a Charter decision you disagreed with so much that you would be willing to give a government the power to override that Charter rights decision- knowing that this same power could also be used against all those other rights that protect you?

Sure - in theory that day may come at some point - that's why the notwithstanding power was placed in the Constitution as a compromise. I personally can't think of a plausible example where its use would be appropriate.

But it sure as hell ISN'T there so that every nitwit government that's pissed off by a court decision and has taken all of 4 hours to think about it can stomp all over the rights and freedoms you thought were guaranteed.