Still, the premier’s decision to invoke Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms — the so-called notwithstanding clause — to enact his proposal, despite the judicial finding against it, is entirely correct. The notwithstanding clause is rarely used (this is its first time in Ontario) and is rightly deemed a last-resort option. These critics have entirely missed the point; using the clause may be unusual, but so was the judge’s ruling against Ontario’s intended Bill 5. Ontario is … availing itself of an entirely legal reply to a bizarre and patently flawed legal rulingVoters in Toronto, and beyond, could certainly be forgiven for having found this entire affair unsightly. But in the world we actually live in, judges are fallibly human and the notwithstanding clause exists for that reason.

Source: National Post September 14, 2018 21:18 UTC