Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that Committee Motion 91-18(2) be amended by inserting the words "except in cases of exceptional circumstances as determined upon application by the prospective candidate to the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories" immediately after the words "position of trust, authority or intimacy" in the second paragraph. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. There is a motion to amend the motion. The motion is on the floor and being distributed. The motion to amend is in order. To the amendment to the motion. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I think one of the highest obligations of any legislator is to ensure that the rights of Canadians, and certainly in our case the rights of all Northerners, are protected including essential democratic rights, and the Charter is our guide to doing that.
I am concerned that the amendment as indicated in Committee Motion 91-18(2) does not adequately ensure that the constitutional rights of Northerners will be protected and potentially infringed by a ban for running for office, and I propose this amendment is a way to provide certainty that, should a ban be brought forward, those subject to it still have an avenue of recourse to apply by way of petition to the Supreme Court and request an exemption to the ban based on exceptional circumstances.
Should this amendment pass, there will be work required to determine those exceptional circumstances, but I believe this is the best way forward to ensure that this Assembly can both send a strong message about expected behaviour of responsible citizens in the Northwest Territories and respond to the epidemic of family violence, which is clearly indicated in both our mandate and priorities document and has been referenced many times by the honourable Members of this House on various occasions and on various topics.
We have an obligation to be role models, but we also have an obligation to make sure that the rights of Northerners are protected, and this seeks a balance to do both. I know this topic has not been without controversy, and as the honourable Member for Frame Lake mentioned, that's a good thing. It's good that we can debate this fully and understand exactly what we're trying to achieve with recommendations such as these and motions such as these. I do believe that we have an onus to ensure without a doubt that rights are respected when we are making statements and changing the rules for the reason of addressing social ills in our territory.
So with that, Mr. Chair, I will yield my time, but I look forward to debate on this amendment and any other motion. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. To the amendment to the motion, Mr. Sebert.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I see this amendment as being very problematic. Surely the decision as to whether a person can stand for election is the job of this House. I don't think we should advocate to the judiciary that job.
The amendment says "except in cases of exceptional circumstances as determined upon application by a prospective candidate to the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories," it doesn't even give any direction to the court as to what these exceptional circumstances might be. This would remove from us and put into the courts the decision as to whether a candidate can run, and in my view it's totally unacceptable and I'm urging Members to reject this motion. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Sebert. Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have a question on the original motion, so I will wait until the original motion comes back up for discussion.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. It may not, but you can wait. To the amendment to the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I guess I would like to ask the law clerk, if I may. I know I had some concerns initially about this terminology of exceptional circumstances, but I'm just wondering if we might be able to hear from the law clerk in terms of what this would do in terms of the Charter right. Why don't we start with that? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Mr. O'Reilly asked me to direct it to the law clerk, so I'll direct it to Deputy Law Clerk Ms. Holland. Ms. Holland.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, I'll speak briefly. Given that there is little detail in the amendment to the committee motion regarding the meaning of "exceptional circumstances," it's difficult for me to say what implications this might have on the constitutionality more broadly of the proposed legislative amendments.
It is possible that something like this could potentially provide an avenue for judicial oversight in cases where the application of these legislative changes could raise concerns about Charter validity, perhaps with respect to arbitrariness or other kinds of concerns that tend to raise red flags about Charter compliance, but as drafted, I'm not able to provide an opinion on how that would apply in this case.
Thank you, Ms. Holland. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I guess I'd like to ask through you, then, another question, if I may. I've got a couple of ideas of things that could be considered as exceptional circumstances, but I'll just go ahead and throw them out there. Somebody who may be a few days or a week short if they were caught within that five year period and an election had been called and they may be a few days short of something. Presumably that is the sort of thing that could be determined through this sort of process as an exceptional circumstance. Is that the sort of thing that could be defined in that way? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Ms. Holland.
My view is that, simply based on the discussion we are having now, that could be something that could be drafted into legislation as an example of an exceptional circumstance. Obviously, I think there would need to be more discussion regarding the particular harm that the legislature is seeking to avoid by invoking a provision like this. That said, allowing a mechanism for judicial oversight where the consequences of these legislative changes could have a particularly harsh consequence for a particular individual in their circumstances may have a consequence for the constitutionality of legislation in terms of making it less likely to be found to be contrary to the Charter. That said, again, to provide a more definitive opinion I would have to see the proposed language.
Thank you, Ms. Holland. Anything further? Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I think I have put the Law Clerk on the hot seat long enough. I guess the other circumstance that might be construed as exceptional by some would be if someone had a Criminal Code conviction and was prohibited from running. Assuming all the conditions were still there, if someone had been through a healing process journey and had completed that sort of treatment and so on, would this be another way of defining what an exceptional circumstance could be?
Where I am going with this, Mr. Chair, is I view this as a potentially friendly amendment and worthy of probably some further work. I think, as drafting instructions, general direction, in terms of amending the original motion, I think this is helpful. I haven't really had a chance to discuss this with any of my committee colleagues. That is my personal view. I think it would also probably address some of the issues and concerns that we have heard from some members of the public. I view this as a friendly amendment. I am prepared to support it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the amendment. Mr. McNeely.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. To the amendment. Taking into account the integrity of this institution and listening to my colleague across the way who has legal background and looking at the amendment and the wording on exceptional circumstances, that could be defined in several ways, if passed, could go against the integrity of this institution to use something so vague that would be caught up in litigation for several weeks or several months depending on the court's schedule to really define what is exceptional. By that time, two Assemblies may have passed. To me, it doesn't strengthen the integrity of this institution to have acts of loopholes or defined as loopholes, and really not viewed to the reader as a real defined terminology on exceptional circumstances. I just point that out, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McNeely. To the amendment. Ms. Green.
Mr. Chair, I am not sure about how the procedure would work here. I wonder if we could amend the amendment to refer this motion back to the Rules and Procedures Committee to take on the task of defining exceptional circumstances and to bring that recommendation back after that work is considered. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Green. You need to put forward a motion to amend the amendment to the motion at this point in order to do that. Do you have a motion?
I could make one. I move that recommendation number 2 of the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures report entitled "You Are Standing for Your People" be referred back to the Rules and Procedures Committee for further clarification. Thank you.
We are going to take a brief recess.
---SHORT RECESS
I call the Committee of the Whole back to order. We have a motion on the floor. Ms. Green, would you please read your motion?
