Act respecting the exercise of the fundamental rights and prerogatives of the Québec people and the Québec State

"An Act respecting the exercise of the fundamental rights and prerogatives of the Québec people and the Québec State" (Bill 99) (R.S.Q., c. E-20.2) (French: "Loi sur l'Exercice des droits fondamentaux et des prérogatives du peuple québécois et de l'État du Québec, L.R.Q. c. E-20.2") is a Quebec law passed in opposition and in contradiction with the federal "Clarity Act" (S.C. 2000, c. 26). The Act was introduced by Joseph Facal to the National Assembly of Quebec in emergency on 15 December 1999, two days after the introduction of Bill C-20 before the Canadian House of Commons. It was adopted on 7 December 2000, by a majority of 69 against 41.

Whereas the federal act states that, in the case of a referendum about the secession of a Canadian province, the House of Commons has the power to determine afterwards whether the question was clear enough and whether the obtained majority was large enough for the result to be accepted, the provincial one stipulates that Quebecers could opt for the secession of Quebec State by obtaining a simple majority of votes in a referendum. Both acts are mandates given to their respective governments.

The motivating force behind passage of the "Act respecting the exercise of the fundamental rights and prerogatives of the Québec people and the Québec State" was to ensure that, even absent a referendum, Quebec's political fate could result only from decisions made by Quebecers and not by other Canadians. The constitutional validity of both "Clarity Act" and the "Act respecting the exercise of the fundamental rights and prerogatives of the Québec people and the Québec State" has been questioned, however, with respect to the Constitution Act 1867's allocation of legislative powers between the federal and provincial government.

Legal Challenge to Bill 99

In August 2007, three justices of the Quebec Court of Appeal judged unanimously that Keith Henderson, previous chief of the English-rights Equality Party, has permissible position to question the lawfulness of Bill 99. [http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/editorial/story.html?id=940b6480-253f-47c0-836f-d5d8aed3361e]

Henderson's lawyer, Brent Tyler declared that the Quebec administration, which replied that his client does not have warranted rank to try Bill 99, can question the Supreme Court of Canada to permit a supplication of this week's decision. But he didn't anticipate such a question to be authorized. [http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/editorial/story.html?id=940b6480-253f-47c0-836f-d5d8aed3361e]

External links

* [http://www.canlii.org/qc/laws/sta/e-20.2/20041104/whole.html Text of the Act]