[clwg]

This argument mischaracterizes the notwithstanding clause. Invoking s.33 is highly visible and carries political consequences. It shields a law only from being struck down on certain Charter grounds and must still comply with all other federal and provincial legislation (like PIPEDA).

It’s not perfect, but it does provide some flexibility to accommodate provincial differences. And the concerns people raise about the notwithstanding clause can just as easily occur in countries without it. Personally, I’d be much more concerned if we had FISA courts.

[int_19h]

The point is that your legislatures can override most of your Charter if they feel like it. Now sure, they have to explicitly say that they're doing that, which is a slight improvement on the state of affairs in, say, UK. But if you ever get someone like Trump in Canada (and if that sounds far-fetched to you, well, it sounded far-fetched to most Americans 10 years ago...), he'd be able to move so much faster.