Episode 3: Quebec's Long Relationship with Section 33
Échec de l'ajout au panier.
Échec de l'ajout à la liste d'envies.
Échec de la suppression de la liste d’envies.
Échec du suivi du balado
Ne plus suivre le balado a échoué
Episode 3: Quebec's Long Relationship with Section 33
-
Narrateur(s):
-
Auteur(s):
À propos de cet audio
While the notwithstanding clause was once aptly described as a "sleeping giant," things were always more complicated in Quebec. Having seen the Constitution partiated without its consent in 1982, the Quebec government promptly used section 33 as a tool of protest, applying it to all existing provincial legislation to blunt the force of the new Charter. More than a dozen invocations followed in the ensuing decades, but the public response was generally muted, if not silent. Then, in 2019, the Legault government passed Bill 21, a law that prohibits the wearing of visible religious symbols in certain public sectors jobs. The backlash against Bill 21 was swift, and the question was posed: where is the line between legitimate protection of a province's distinct culture, and the othering of its minority populations?
With the controversy over Bill 21 still raging, and with a Supreme Court hearing coming up, we talked to Professor Jean Leclair (University of Montreal) and Cee Strauss (LEAF) about the past, present, and future of Quebec's unique relationship with section 33, and about how litigants in the Bill 21 case are trying to get around the seemingly insurmountable obstacle of the notwithstanding clause.