Queen Elizabeth II signs Canada's constitutional proclamation in Ottawa on April 17, 1982 as Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, seated at left, looks on. Standing closest to the table, from left, Jean Chretien, Andre Ouellet, Gerald Regan, Michael Pitfield and Micheal Kirby. The Constitution Act gave Canada control over its Constitution and guaranteed the rights and freedoms in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the supreme law of the nation.
There’s the “multicultural heritage” hedge. There’s the “denominational schools” fudge. And of course there’s the biggest loophole of them all, Section 33, the notwithstanding clause. The questions facing the court were, in the main, three. One, does the Charter apply, i.e. can such a case even be brought against an Indigenous government? Two, if it does, does Ms.
But as to the third question – whether Indigenous governments, even if the Charter applies, should nevertheless be given some extra wiggle room – my preference would be simply to take this under consideration in applying the reasonable limits test: minimal impairment, proportionality, all that rot. The six other judges also agreed that Ms. Dickson had a prima facie case that her rights had been violated by the residency requirement. But they split on what to do about it, reaching different conclusions about the general circumstances under which Section 25 could save a law that would otherwise run afoul of the Charter, and therefore whether this particular law should be allowed to stand.