The Notwithstanding Clause, the Charter, and Canada's Patriated Constitution: What I Thought We Were Doing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Professor Whyte, in his article “Sometimes Constitutions are Made in the Streets: the Future of the Charter’s Notwithstanding Clause,” raises some intriguing points. He gives a historical review of the origin of the “notwithstanding” clause as it appears in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, enacted in 1982. In the course of so doing, he appears to propose a distinction between “rights” – those claims which are included in the Charter, and “policies” – those claims which are protected by the activities of the legislative and executive arms of government. This is, I argue, a false dichotomy. It leads to the conclusion that the use of the “notwithstanding” clause can only amount to a suspension of rights in favour of achieving government policy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.065 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".