Martin: Let's clear up some misconceptions regarding Bill C-16 |
There has been much criticism of the Liberal government’s Bill C-16 as it pertains to mandatory minimum punishments for a variety of crimes, many relating to child victims.
Critics point out that although the government of Prime Minister Mark Carney is proposing to reinstate many mandatory minimum punishments that have been struck down by courts, the bill allows judges to ignore those provisions in extreme cases.
Some, including opposition leader Pierre Poilievre, are suggesting the government instead should be invoking the notwithstanding clause to override judicial pronouncements that minimum punishments violate the Charter by amounting to cruel and unusual punishment.
Your weekday lunchtime roundup of curated links, news highlights, analysis and features.
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of Noon News Roundup will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
Interested in more newsletters? Browse here.
But instead of invoking a clause in the Charter intended for only the most extreme cases, the federal Liberals are doing the prudent thing.
First off, let’s look at the notwithstanding clause and what it really........