Justice Minister David Lametti is defending the federal government’s authority to challenge provincial laws that are believed to violate the rights of Canadians, after Quebec said Ottawa’s reaction to Bills 21 and 96 “respect.”
“We are only testing the limits of a law, whether it violates the charter or the federal jurisdiction. We have done so since the beginning of the Confederacy. We will continue to do so. It is a legitimate tool. It is not insulting to anyone. “It’s part of the process,” the Quebec MP said in CTV’s question period.
The federal government has maintained that it is up to Quebecers to take the initiative in any appeal of both laws, but has indicated that they intend to intervene in Bill 21, should it end up in the Supreme Court of Canada.
Bill 21 went into effect in June 2019 and prohibits some officials, including teachers and police offerings, from wearing religious symbols while working. Bill 96 was passed on May 24 and states that the only official and common language of Quebec is French. The central goal is to ensure that French is used exclusively in workplaces and in municipalities.
Critics of the bill say neither represents an inclusive Quebec and argue that it violates certain provisions of the Bill of Rights and Freedoms.
Lametti’s comments come days after Quebec Prime Minister Francois Legault asked Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to “please have some respect for the majority of Quebecers,” who he says supports the controversial secularism law and the language.
His justice minister, Simon Jolin-Barrette, added that no bill is a matter for Ottawa but “a matter for Quebec.”
Lametti called the reaction “absurd.”
“There are challenges to the federal jurisdiction by the provinces all the time, there are challenges to the provincial jurisdiction by the federal government all the time,” he said, noting that Legault took Ottawa to court for carbon tax scheme.
NECESSARY REVISION OF THE EXISTENCE CLAUSE
In introducing both Bill 21 and Bill 96, the Quebec government invariably invoked the no-harm clause, which allows provincial legislatures to temporarily overturn sections of the charter while protecting them from many challenges. judicial.
Lametti said he does not believe the clause should be used in this way.
“The clause, however, was to be used as the last word in a dialogue between legislatures and courts, giving the last word to the legislatures. It does not want to be the first word. When it is the first word, it advances not only in the political debate, but also in the judicial review of the actual provision and it really destroys the structure of the letter, ”he said.
The minister added that, more generally, it was time for the Supreme Court to review it.
“At the moment, there is a Supreme Court ruling that says it can be used that way. I would say it’s time to review this Supreme Court ruling, we ask the Supreme Court to look into it again,” he said.