Warren J. Newman

The Governor in Council referred three questions to the Supreme Court of Canada regarding the legality of a unilateral secession by Quebec.

The Court held that under the Constitution, unilateral secession is illegal.

However, the democratic principle dictates that a clear majority vote on a clear question in favour of secession would create a constitutional obligation on the rest of Canada to negotiate the terms of secession.

Under international law, the right to self-determination does not grant a right to unilateral secession to a constituent part of a democratic state that respects human rights and provides access to government.

Therefore, there is no conflict between domestic and international law.

Following the 1985 Reference re Manitoba Language Rights decision, a dispute arose regarding which instruments had to be translated to comply with s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that s. 23 applies to orders in council of a legislative nature, determined by their form, content, and effect.

The Court also held that documents incorporated by reference in legislation must be translated if the primary instrument is legislative, the incorporation is true, and the document was generated by the government, unless there is a bona fide reason for incorporation without translation.

The period of temporary validity for unilingual Acts was extended.

The Supreme Court of Canada granted an application to hold a special hearing to determine constitutional questions regarding the translation and temporary validity of Manitoba laws under section 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870.

The Court ordered that the temporary validity of the laws in question be continued until the hearing is held and judgment is rendered.