Bill 39, Notwithstanding Clause Limitation Act, 2025
Chamber
ontario
Stage
Introduced
This Ontario bill restricts when the notwithstanding clause can be used and requires a two-thirds majority to pass such bills.
Key Changes
- Limits use of the notwithstanding clause to two specific circumstances: urgent crises threatening lives/health/safety, or fixing a court-found Charter violation
- Requires the Attorney General to table a public report within 30 days justifying any government use of the notwithstanding clause
- Raises the threshold for passing a bill with the notwithstanding clause from a simple majority to a two-thirds supermajority of all elected MPPs
- Requires the report to explain what alternatives were considered and why they were rejected
- Creates a new standalone Act governing notwithstanding clause use in Ontario
Gotchas
- The two-thirds majority requirement would effectively give opposition parties a veto over notwithstanding clause legislation, since a majority government typically holds fewer than two-thirds of seats.
- The bill only applies to bills introduced by ministers of the Crown for the Attorney General report requirement, meaning private members' bills using the clause may face different procedural treatment.
- The bill does not define 'urgent and critical situation' or 'temporary nature,' which could lead to disputes about whether a given situation qualifies.
- This is a provincial bill that cannot constitutionally remove the notwithstanding clause itself — it only adds procedural requirements within Ontario's legislature.
- If passed, a future majority government could repeal this Act with a simple majority, removing these restrictions.
Who's Affected
- Ontario provincial government and Cabinet ministers
- The Attorney General of Ontario
- All elected MPPs at Queen's Park
- Ontario residents whose Charter rights could be affected by notwithstanding clause legislation
- Opposition parties, who gain more influence due to the supermajority requirement
Vibes
0 responses
Gotchas
- The two-thirds majority requirement would effectively give opposition parties a veto over notwithstanding clause legislation, since a majority government typically holds fewer than two-thirds of seats.
- The bill only applies to bills introduced by ministers of the Crown for the Attorney General report requirement, meaning private members' bills using the clause may face different procedural treatment.
- The bill does not define 'urgent and critical situation' or 'temporary nature,' which could lead to disputes about whether a given situation qualifies.
- This is a provincial bill that cannot constitutionally remove the notwithstanding clause itself — it only adds procedural requirements within Ontario's legislature.
- If passed, a future majority government could repeal this Act with a simple majority, removing these restrictions.
Summary
Bill 39 proposes limits on how the Ontario government can use Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, known as the 'notwithstanding clause.' This clause normally allows governments to pass laws that override certain Charter rights. Under this bill, the Ontario government could only use the notwithstanding clause in very specific situations: when there is an urgent, temporary crisis threatening lives or safety, or when fixing a law that a court has already found to violate the Charter. If a government minister introduces a bill using the notwithstanding clause, the Attorney General must table a report within 30 days explaining why the override is justified in a free and democratic society and why other options were not good enough. This adds a layer of public accountability to the process. Additionally, any bill invoking the notwithstanding clause would need approval from at least two-thirds of elected MPPs — a much higher bar than the simple majority normally required to pass legislation. This bill was introduced by MPP Lucille Collard and is currently at First Reading.
Automatically generated from bill text using Claude
Vibes
0 responses