Legal agreements are excluded from the analysis to focus on the greater difference in Congressional participation between contracts and executive agreements. However, the concept of a non-compliance clause was not created by the Charter. The existence of the clause makes the Charter similar to the Canadian Bill of Rights (1960), which, according to Section 2, states that “an Act of Parliament” may declare that a law “must operate independently of the Bill of Rights Canada.” A major difference is that the “Bill of Rights” clause could be used to invalidate “everything” right, not just certain clauses, as in the case of the Charter. The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code (1979), the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms (1977) and the Alberta Bill of Rights (1972) also contain provisions such as the non-compliance clause.  The idea of the clause was proposed by Peter Lougheed, as proposed by Merv Leitch.  The clause was a compromise reached during the debate on the new Constitution in the early 1980s. Among the major complaints of the provinces with the Charter were the transfer of power from elected officials to the courts, which gave the courts the final say. Section 33, coupled with the Section 1 restriction clause, should give provincial legislators greater influence over the passage of legislation. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau initially vehemently rejected the clause, but ultimately agreed to accept it under pressure from the province`s premiers.  The Parliament of Canada, a provincial legislative or territorial legislative power may declare that one of its statutes or part of a statute applies temporarily (“notwithstanding”) to the provisions of the Charter, the removal of jurisdictional control by ennouncing the protection of the Charter for a limited period of time. This involves inserting into the law a section that clearly defines the rights that have been repealed.
A simple majority in one of Canada`s 14 countries may suspend the fundamental rights of the Charter. However, the rights to be transcribed must be either a “fundamental right” guaranteed by Section 2 (such as freedom of expression, religion and association), a “legal right” guaranteed by paragraphs 7 to 14 (such as the right to liberty and freedom of search and seizure, as well as cruel and unusual punishment), or a “right to equality” under Section 15.  Other rights, such as Section 6 of mobility, democratic rights and language rights, are invisible. On December 21, 1988, following the Supreme Court of Canada`s decision in Ford/Québec (AG), the Quebec National Assembly occupied Section 33 and Section 52 of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms in Bill 178.