Manitoba has submitted its argument to the Supreme Court regarding Quebec’s controversial secularism law, advocating for the ability of courts to assess whether laws, even those utilizing the notwithstanding clause, infringe on Canadians’ rights.
The province’s attorney general contends that courts should have the authority to determine if laws such as Quebec’s Bill 21 violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, despite the notwithstanding clause allowing governments to supersede certain protected rights. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a legal challenge against Bill 21, brought by various opposing groups, with a hearing date pending.
Multiple interveners, including several provinces like Manitoba, are involved in the Supreme Court case. Bill 21, enacted in 2019, prohibits public-sector employees, including teachers and judges, from displaying visible religious symbols while at work. Quebec employed the notwithstanding clause to shield the law from legal challenges, enabling Parliament and legislatures to pass legislation overriding specific Charter sections for a limited period.
Although the notwithstanding clause cannot override democratic rights, it can nullify sections relating to fundamental freedoms, legal rights, and equality rights, including the freedom of religion under Section 2. The clause was introduced in 1982 to prevent the Charter from overshadowing provincial and federal authorities, with former Ontario Premier Bill Davis emphasizing its intended rare use.
Premier Wab Kinew of Manitoba expressed the government’s intervention in the Supreme Court case as a means to safeguard the province’s interests, particularly emphasizing the importance of religious freedom to Manitobans. Kinew highlighted the significance of allowing courts to evaluate the constitutionality of government actions for informed voter decision-making, underscoring the province’s commitment to upholding democracy and protecting Charter rights.
Manitoba’s formal intervention underscores the promotion of constructive dialogue between government branches and the provision of impartial information to voters on legislative impacts on Charter rights. The province’s filing coincided with similar submissions by the federal government and British Columbia to the Supreme Court, urging limitations on the notwithstanding clause’s usage to prevent lasting harm to Canadians’ rights.
Intervening provinces, including Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, who have all utilized the notwithstanding clause, supported Quebec’s stance. Notably, the federal government has never invoked the notwithstanding clause. Manitoba had previously announced its intent to intervene in any Supreme Court battle concerning Bill 21 in 2022, aiming to establish a precedent on religious freedom nationwide.
In 2019, former Premier Brian Pallister’s government initiated an advertising campaign in Quebec encouraging individuals impacted by Bill 21 to relocate to Manitoba. Additionally, former Winnipeg Mayor Brian Bowman pledged financial support towards the legal opposition to the bill, illustrating the widespread concern and engagement surrounding the contentious legislation.
