Although rarely used historically, the notwithstanding clause has seen a resurgence of interest. In recent months, premiers have indicated a willingness to invoke the notwithstanding clause in cases involving religious expression in Quebec, electoral changes in Ontario, and religious school funding in Saskatchewan.

This webinar will address the ongoing debate about the clause's appropriate role and use. Central to the debate are competing ideas about who should make decisions involving fundamental human rights. A panel of experts will weigh in on the debate and offer commentary on the notwithstanding clause's function and future in Canadian constitutional decision-making.

This webinar will consider the following questions:

• When is it appropriate to invoke the notwithstanding clause? Only in certain contexts? Never?
• Is Section 33 subject to limits in light of other Charter provisions (e.g. preamble, s. 28)?
• What roles should legislatures and courts serve, respectively, in protecting/balancing human rights?
• How should disagreements between courts/legislatures ultimately be resolved?
• How do these issues affect the way Charter cases should be argued and decided?