|
Today at noon in Regina members and staff of GSU attended a rally at the Legislature challenging the provincial government's recent announcement to use the not withstanding clause to push their pronoun law.
Here’s a quick recap of what led to today.
Things started at the end of the last school year over what was appropriate sexual education content for students. This led to an announcement that the government was seeking new rules requiring students under 16 years of age to have parental consent before changing their pronouns in school.
This was challenged at Court of King’s Bench and the judge issued an injunction pausing the new law from coming into effect until the court can hear the entire case.
Almost immediately following this decision, the provincial government indicated they would recall the legislature and would use the Charter of Rights and Freedoms notwithstanding clause to force the law into effect.
Why does it matter?
In English, our most commonly used pronouns (he/she) specifically refer to a person’s gender. For queer, gender non-conforming, non-binary, and transgender people, these pronouns may not fit, can create discomfort, and can cause stress and anxiety. A recent study showed that in transgender youth, using correct pronouns and names reduces depression and suicide risks.
Notwithstanding Clause
The notwithstanding clause in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, also known as Section 33, allows provincial or federal governments in Canada to temporarily override certain rights and freedoms protected by the Charter. Here are some of the problems and criticisms associated with the notwithstanding clause.
One of the most significant concerns is that the notwithstanding clause can be used by governments to limit or suspend fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter. Critics argue that this undermines the very purpose of having a Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Some worry that governments may use the notwithstanding clause too liberally, potentially infringing on rights without sufficient justification. This could lead to a situation where rights are routinely violated without proper accountability.
There is also concern that governments may invoke the notwithstanding clause for political reasons rather than to address pressing issues or emergencies. This could be seen as a way to pander to specific interest groups or curry favor with certain constituencies.
Diminished Protections: When the notwithstanding clause is used, it essentially renders certain Charter rights temporarily ineffective. This can leave individuals without the full protection of their rights during that period.
There are concerns that the notwithstanding clause could be used to target vulnerable or marginalized groups, particularly if the government has a political agenda that goes against the rights of these groups. The example we have today is exactly what is worrying people.
We shouldn’t be comfortable with our elected officials skirting the Charter for a political hot button issue that a judge has said is very likely to cause harm to young people in this province.
GSU has always stood with marginalized people in society. As working people we want to raise the standard or living for everyone. What we want for ourselves we want for everyone.
Read the full story on our web page.
| 
