.

             5) Subsection (3) applies in respect of a re-enactment made under subsection (4).

             In laymen terms, this says that when one government passes a bill, if the other feels that it interferes with one of their own policies, then the latter government can use the clause to void it as law in their region of control. The clause can also be used by governments who feel that a supreme court ruling does not apply to their jurisdiction. When a government cannot demonstrate why they have restricted freedoms, it can use the notwithstanding clause. This allows the government to pass legislation voiding any right or freedom set out in the Charter, and there is no way to fight their actions . Not even the courts can reverse the decision.

             The notwithstanding clause is only good for five years. So, when the five years expires, the current government must re- declare the clause for the laws it is trying to protect from the charter. When this was introduced in the House of Commons as a part of the new constitution in 1981, Jean Chretien, minister of finance at the time stated that the clause "is unlikely ever to be used except in non-controversial circumstances." The participants in drafting th charter felt this clause would satisfy the critics of their bill. They did not realize the impact that it would have on Canadian politics.

             Why should the Notwithstanding Clause be removed from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? First, and foremost it's unsatisfactory history. In most cases that it has been used, it can be argued that it's use infringed on constitutional rights stated earlier in the charter. In 1985, the Saskatchewan Government Employees' Union (S.G.E.U.) were in a collective bargaining dispute with the government of Saskatchewan. The union declared a strike, and the government issued a back to work legislation. In the S.G.E.U. Dispute Settlement Act, the government said:.

             "Pursuant to subsection 33(1) of the Canadian charter of Rights and Freedoms, this Act is declared to operate notwithstanding the freedom of association in paragraph 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.