Poilievre sets up notwithstanding election over crime with Trudeau

Article content

Should Parliament, through our elected representatives in the House of Commons, have the last say — or that be left to unelected judges?

Article content

That question is about to be front and centre in the next federal election as Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre promises to pass tough-on-crime legislation, even if it means using the notwithstanding clause. Poilievre first talked about this during his bid to become leader of the Conservative Party but his mention of it Monday in a speech caught people’s attention.

Article content

Speaking to the Canadian Association of Police, Poilievre was lamenting the soft-on-crime approach the Trudeau Liberals have adopted. He pointed to bail changes by the Liberals, softer prison sentences and easier jail time for convicts.

“It will be an automatic, fait accompli, that multiple murderers will stay in maximum security. And by the way, they will have consecutive and not concurrent sentences. Multiple murderers will only come out of prison in a box,” Poilievre said.

Article content

Article content

He mentioned Paul Bernardo, a serial killer and rapist recently moved to a medium-security prison when making the comments.

“All of my proposals are constitutional, and we will make them constitutional using whatever tools the Constitution allows me to use to make them constitutional,” he said.

Recommended video

“I think you know exactly what I mean. They will happen, and they will stay in place.”

It’s clear Poilievre is talking about using the notwithstanding clause of the Constitution, otherwise known as Sec. 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He’s giving notice that he intends to use that section to override out of control courts, and he believes voters will back him.

“I will be the democratically elected prime minister, democratically accountable to the people, and they can make the judgments themselves whether these laws are constitutional,” Poilievre said.

Article content

Of course, these comments set off the Trudeau Liberals, who are outraged that a leader would even suggest using a section of the Constitution.

“He gave a speech pledging to overturn the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” Trudeau said in the Commons.

Let’s say this slowly, one more time for Trudeau, who can’t seem to get it.

The notwithstanding clause is part of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it is not overturning the Charter to use part of the Charter. He should understand this; it was his father who put the notwithstanding clause into the Charter and enshrined it in the Constitution.

The fact that Liberals don’t like the clause doesn’t mean it isn’t valid to use.

Part of the reason it has to be used is due to an overreaching court system that strikes down laws passed by Parliament, not based on the cases before them, but on hypothetical cases that they dream up.

Article content

In a decision handed down last fall, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down a one-year mandatory minimum for child luring as cruel and unusual. The main case involved a 22 year-old man who befriended and groomed a 13 year-old girl for two years and then engaged in sex with her.

In their decision, the court imagined a first-year female high school teacher in her late 20s with bipolar disorder who engages in sexual touching with a 15-year-old student but then shows remorse. Based on this imagined scenario, the court found mandatory minimums for child luring unconstitutional.

Other mandatory minimums have been struck down in a similar way on sexual assault and a man shooting up a house with sleeping children inside. Putting cases like this before the Canadian public and promising to protect the rights of victims and ordinary citizens over criminals, as Poilievre has done, would be a winning campaign.

If Trudeau wants to defend easier sentences for child predators or people shooting up houses, let him.

Article content