Murray Wood: Raiding the kid's loot is a great Halloween tradition
Murray Wood says Halloween is fun for kids and for the adults who raid their candy. But trying to con his 10-year-old da...
REGINA — Saskatchewan’s Court of Appeal is hearing arguments about a provincial law that requires parental consent when children under 16 want to change their names or pronouns at school.
A judge ruled earlier this year a challenge of the law could continue, even though the government invoked the notwithstanding clause to override certain Charter rights.
The province has asked the Court of Appeal to quash that ruling, arguing use of the notwithstanding clause should end the legal dispute.
Lawyers for UR Pride, an LGBTQ+ group that brought forward the challenge, argue the law causes irreparable harm to gender diverse youth and the case should go forward.
They also say the law forces youth to come out or be misgendered and misnamed at school.
The governments of Alberta and New Brunswick have intervened in the case on the side of Saskatchewan, saying parents have ultimate authority over the lives of their children.
New Brunswick has also enforced a pronoun rule that requires parents’ consent for pronoun or name changes for students under 16. The Alberta government has said it plans to introduce legislation this fall that would require parental consent for students under 16.
UR Pride has argued that the court could declare a violation of the Charter, even if making such a declaration does not strike down the law.
The Court of King’s Bench judge had permitted UR Pride to amend its case and argue the law violates the section of the Charter that guarantees the right to be free from cruel and unusual treatment.
The province has argued the judge shouldn’t have allowed the change. The province invoked the clause over three sections of the Charter that guarantee freedom of expression, liberty and equal protection.
Bennett Jensen, director of legal at Egale Canada, co-counsel for UR Pride told 980 CJME outside the court on Monday that the arguments in the case are very technical.
“It all boils down to what the role of the court is once the notwithstanding clause has been used. And our position, UR Pride’s position, is that the court retains an important role when the government chooses to violate the Charter rights of young people or any part of the population,” he said.
” … the courts deciding what their role is in that context is hugely important … for people of all identities, backgrounds, positions in society.”
Last year, Saskatchewan’s Human Rights Commission asked the province to consider not passing the law after one of its commissioners resigned in protest.
Saskatchewan’s child advocate has also said the policy violates rights to gender identity and expression.
— with files from Lisa Schick, 980 CJME
Read more
