Thank you for the question. I'd be happy to send some of those specific proposals. The United States is one jurisdiction. One can establish numerous objective criteria to create a kind of gating situation wherein if these factors are met, plus the judge considers the punishment to be grossly disproportionate or cruel and unusual punishment, then it could be levied.
With respect to the notwithstanding clause, it's very clear that this is part of the charter and not something that is some sort of exception to it. In fact, constitutions are not straightforward. The text does not exhaustively define and prescribe all features of a right or how it's to be balanced with other rights or laws or policy objectives. It's very much a back-and-forth between the legislature and the courts in terms of how to interpret, define and operationalize laws to ensure their protection of the right in question, and even to operationalize the right itself. It's very much a legitimate part of the law. I think it reflects our Westminster parliamentary system that gives great deference to Parliament for enacting laws, and—