Archive:Notwithstanding clause: Difference between revisions
→United Kingdom: +ref |
→United Kingdom: European Scrutiny committee |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
During the [[Brexit]] process, the [[Internal Market Bill]] initially included provisions enabling ministers to make regulations that would operate despite incompatible domestic or international law.<ref>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-statement-on-notwithstanding-clauses/government-statement-on-notwithstanding-clauses</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Islam |first=Faisal |title=Will there be a further Brexit breach of the law? |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55144313 |website=BBC News |date=1 December 2020 |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | title=Brick Court Chambers | url=https://www.brickcourt.co.uk/brexit-blog/2021/01 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | title=True (Bad) Faith 2020? Part Two: Excavating the Legal Rationale for the 'Emergency Clauses' in the UK Internal Market Bill – RECONNECT | date=24 November 2020 | url=https://reconnect-europe.eu/blog/true-bad-faith-2020-part-two-excavating-the-legal-rationale-for-the-emergency-clauses-in-the-uk-internal-market-bill/ }}</ref> The House of Lords European Union Committee described the relevant provision as a “notwithstanding clause”.<ref>{{cite web |title=The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill: Part 5 |url=https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/3019/documents/28597/default/ |publisher=House of Lords European Union Committee |date=16 October 2020 |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref> The provisions were withdrawn before the Bill received [[royal assent]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Brexit: UK and EU reach deal on Northern Ireland border checks |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55229681 |website=BBC News |date=8 December 2020 |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref> | During the [[Brexit]] process, the [[Internal Market Bill]] initially included provisions enabling ministers to make regulations that would operate despite incompatible domestic or international law.<ref>https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-statement-on-notwithstanding-clauses/government-statement-on-notwithstanding-clauses</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Islam |first=Faisal |title=Will there be a further Brexit breach of the law? |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55144313 |website=BBC News |date=1 December 2020 |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | title=Brick Court Chambers | url=https://www.brickcourt.co.uk/brexit-blog/2021/01 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | title=True (Bad) Faith 2020? Part Two: Excavating the Legal Rationale for the 'Emergency Clauses' in the UK Internal Market Bill – RECONNECT | date=24 November 2020 | url=https://reconnect-europe.eu/blog/true-bad-faith-2020-part-two-excavating-the-legal-rationale-for-the-emergency-clauses-in-the-uk-internal-market-bill/ }}</ref> The House of Lords European Union Committee described the relevant provision as a “notwithstanding clause”.<ref>{{cite web |title=The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill: Part 5 |url=https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/3019/documents/28597/default/ |publisher=House of Lords European Union Committee |date=16 October 2020 |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref> The provisions were withdrawn before the Bill received [[royal assent]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Brexit: UK and EU reach deal on Northern Ireland border checks |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55229681 |website=BBC News |date=8 December 2020 |access-date=29 September 2026}}</ref> | ||
In 2010 the [[European Scrutiny Committee]] held hearings on whether notwithstanding clauses aimed at European Union law would be upheld by [[British courts]]. | |||
==Examples== | ==Examples== | ||
Revision as of 19:05, 29 September 2026
Template:AI-generatedTemplate:Short description Template:For
A notwithstanding clause (French: Clause nonobstant), (Lat: Non Obstante) is a provision in legislation that allows a law to operate despite certain other legal rules, rights, or principles that might otherwise conflict with it. Such clauses are used to assert legislative supremacy and to prevent courts from invalidating or limiting the effect of the statute based on conflicting laws or rights.
Overview
In common law jurisdictions, a notwithstanding clause typically uses language such as "notwithstanding any other provision of this Act" or "notwithstanding any law to the contrary". It signals a clear legislative intent that the provision should take precedence over any inconsistent statutory, common law, or constitutional provisions.
Use
Canada
In some jurisdictions, notwithstanding clauses have been used to override certain constitutional rights where allowed by law, for example Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which allows the charter to be overridden on a time limited basis by provincial legislatures.
United States
It can also be used to ensure that statutory provisions prevail over common law principles such as due process if there is a clash, with Section 1983 of the Ku Klux Klan ActTemplate:Sfn[1]
United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, legislation has used notwithstanding language to clarify the relationship between an Act and otherwise applicable domestic or international law. The Safety of Rwanda Act stated that its provisions applied notwithstanding specified provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998,[2] the Act was repealed in 2025.[3]
During the Brexit process, the Internal Market Bill initially included provisions enabling ministers to make regulations that would operate despite incompatible domestic or international law.[4][5][6][7] The House of Lords European Union Committee described the relevant provision as a “notwithstanding clause”.[8] The provisions were withdrawn before the Bill received royal assent.[9]
In 2010 the European Scrutiny Committee held hearings on whether notwithstanding clauses aimed at European Union law would be upheld by British courts.
Examples
- Supremacy Clause
- Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India
See also
References
- ↑ [Institute for Justice (U.S.), amicus brief discussing Section 1983, p. 3
- ↑ "Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024, section 3". https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2024/8/section/3/enacted.
- ↑ "Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025, section 40". https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2025/31/section/40/enacted.
- ↑ https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-statement-on-notwithstanding-clauses/government-statement-on-notwithstanding-clauses
- ↑ Islam, Faisal (1 December 2020). "Will there be a further Brexit breach of the law?". https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55144313.
- ↑ "Brick Court Chambers". https://www.brickcourt.co.uk/brexit-blog/2021/01.
- ↑ "True (Bad) Faith 2020? Part Two: Excavating the Legal Rationale for the 'Emergency Clauses' in the UK Internal Market Bill – RECONNECT". 24 November 2020. https://reconnect-europe.eu/blog/true-bad-faith-2020-part-two-excavating-the-legal-rationale-for-the-emergency-clauses-in-the-uk-internal-market-bill/.
- ↑ "The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill: Part 5". House of Lords European Union Committee. 16 October 2020. https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/3019/documents/28597/default/.
- ↑ "Brexit: UK and EU reach deal on Northern Ireland border checks". 8 December 2020. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55229681.
Sources
- Jaicomo, Patrick; Nelson, Daniel (2026). "Section 1983 (Still) Displaces Qualified Immunity". Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 49: 151–226. https://research.ebsco.com/c/phimeb/viewer/pdf/v56clsemnb.