A🧵on emergency safeguards. No #stateofemergency is safe, & all safeguards ultimately depend on citizens holding leaders accountable, but the #EmergenciesAct has several excellent features that make it safer than most. It's well designed. What are these safeguards?
First, & most importantly, the #EmergenciesAct fits w/ & must conform to the Charter of Rights &Freedoms, & Canada must uphold its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. S.1 of the Charter, & ICCPRArt. 4 allow for emergency rights limitations.
Second, after an emergency is declared, both the House and the Senate must debate and vote on the declaration within 7 days. That is, legislative power can check executive power. If they vote it down, the emergency is over.
Third, all orders made under the emergency must be promptly tabled before parliament. No hiding: everything in view. Publicity helps accountability.
Fourth, there's a sunset clause: after 30 days, both Houses of Parliament must again vote on the continuation of the emergency.
Fifth, a parliamentary review committee must be struck to keep an eye on things. Again, a legislative check on executive power.
Sixth, after the emergency, a commission of inquiry is automatically triggered to look into the causes of the emergency and conduct under the Act. The promise of future accountability makes people self-police.
And finally, so far as I can tell, judicial review of rights derogations is possible under the Act. That's critical. The powers are sweeping, but there's no carte blanche.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/8 🧵Folks are asking 'Why don't we use the Emergencies Act?" This Act came into effect in '88 after the abolition of the War Measures Act, & it's never been used in Canada. That's because we haven't needed it, & that's good. Prov. & municipal powers have done the job. But now?
2/8 In this @IRPP piece, @WesleyWark argued we can't use the Emergencies Act because the Convoy situation doesn't meet the definition of a Public Order Emergency. That definition must be made broader, he claims. But I disagree for two reasons... policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/febr…
3/8 First, the Convoy meets the definition: a) acts of sabotage against Canada's vital interests, & b) there appears to be evidence the Convoy is threatening "serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of achieving a political...objective".