CAQ to renew notwithstanding clause on Bill 96 even as QS, PLQ want to regulate its use
Posted May 6, 2026 7:50 am.
Last Updated May 6, 2026 1:44 pm.
Quebec’s Minister of the French language Jean-François Roberge tabled a new bill to renew the notwithstanding clause on the French language protection law Bill 96, pushing back against critics on the government’s use of the clause.
At a press conference Wednesday, Roberge defended the Coalition Avenir Quebec’s (CAQ) decision to use the notwithstanding clause for Premier Christine Fréchette’s first legislative move since she took office last month.
The notwithstanding clause allows legislators to shield a law from challenges under certain sections of the charters of rights and freedoms.
Opposition parties and legal experts had previously expressed concerns over the frequentuse of the notwithstanding clause by the CAQ government under François Legault, notably to shield its Bill 21 (secularism) and Bill 96 (French language).
‘Dangerous for a democracy’
Québec solidaire (QS) MNA Haroun Bouazzi is expected to introduce a bill on Thursday to regulate the use of the clause, something previously proposed by the Barreau du Québec. The leader of the Quebec Liberal Party (PLQ), Charles Milliard, indicated on Wednesday that he supports the move.
In an interview, Bouazzi expressed serious concern about the increasingly frequent use of the notwithstanding clause in Quebec and elsewhere.
“We are seeing authoritarian tendencies becoming more pronounced almost everywhere,” he said. “The argument that there are no limits to the use of the notwithstanding clause is terribly dangerous for a democracy.”
He proposes limiting the use of the notwithstanding provision to situations where there is a “serious threat to the population” or to protect the French language and Indigenous languages.
The MNA for Maurice-Richard also wants to “promote democratic dialogue” with civil society.
Finally, he proposes that, in order to invoke the notwithstanding, a decision-making threshold of more than 50 per cent be required, i.e. a two-thirds majority vote in the House and the support of two parliamentary groups.
“We are responding to a demand from civil society. The Quebec Bar Association has made a request along these lines. So have the League of Rights and Freedoms and the Quebec Federation of Women,” he argues.
“So, we are responding to these concerns that we share with civil society. (…) We ourselves, as legislators, must set limits on this totally disproportionate power.”
Last February, the bar association sounded the alarm, emphasising that “equality before the law and the recognition of the right to legal dissent are the pillars of our legal system”.
It proposed regulating the use of the notwithstanding clause, an “exceptional mechanism”. Its proposal had been given a cool reception by the CAQ.
Defending notwithstanding clause
Moreover, in her opening speech on Tuesday, Premier Christine Fréchette expressed concern at hearing groups voice such criticisms.
Quoting Robert Bourassa, she stated that the notwithstanding clause “gives us the legal certainty we need to implement a programme that reflects the will of the majority of Quebecers”.
“When I hear political parties or civil society groups criticising the use of these clauses, it worries me, because it is the most important democratic tool for our nation,” she said.
“Thanks to this tool, we can assert loud and clear who we are,” added the premier.
“It’s a strange idea to think that the best thing we’ve done is the derogation clause,” retorts Bouazzi. “It’s irresponsible to say that the clause itself guarantees the nation’s greatness.”
“It absolutely must be clearly defined, because it opens the door to all sorts of abuses, to stepping outside the rule of law, to arbitrariness, to the whims of the majority.”
Bouazzi says he observes that “defending the rule of law at the moment is going against the tide”, before adding that he stands by his positions “entirely”.
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Roberge defended the government’s decision to renew the notwithstanding clause.
“We’ve got to do what we got to do,” Roberge said. “French language will always be in danger in Quebec, in North America. So it’s normal that the only government of a French nation in North America use all its tools to protect our French language, our identity.”
He added that the notwithstanding clause was a tool available to the province and dismissed criticism.
“When (critics) say that, they are talking against the Constitution,” Roberge said. “As Federalists, they should say that Quebeckers should and could use all the tools they have instead of making a referendum.”
Roberge said that Premier Fréchette’s intended to amend Bill 101 to require any training taken by new immigrants, not just school, be in French.
Escalating rhetoric
Roberge also attacked the Liberals calling their politics “toxic.”
“They pretend that they want to protect French, but they don’t do it,” he said.
He also called out PLQ leader Milliard for his support of the QS’s proposal to regulate the use of notwithstanding clause and accused him of flipflopping on many of CAQ’s language laws.
“(Milliard) said that he would move forward with the notwithstanding clause, and then he stepped back,” Roberge said. “We have a liberal party that is committed to attack our bill 101 and I think that everyone in Quebec should be aware of this. Mr. Milliard said this morning that he wants to make additions to Bill 96 and subtractions, but he wouldn’t specify exactly what.”
At a press briefing earlier Wednesday, Milliard described QS’s proposal as “interesting.” The Liberals and QS MNAs had voted against Bill 21, which bans certain government employees from wearing religious symbols.
“I think it’s worth looking into. In fact, I’d like to discuss it with [QS spokesperson] Ruba Ghazal. I reached out to her this morning, and I’d like to talk it over with her,” Milliard said.
“I’m completely open to looking into this. (…) We must respect the primacy of Parliament, but if we can provide justifications to Quebecers (…) through this framework, I think it’s something worth considering,” he added.
