The Constitutionality of Prorogation
At 10:20 a.m. on 4 December 2008 — some forty minutes after Prime Minister Stephen Harper entered Rideau Hall to request that the Governor General, Michaëlle Jean, prorogue Canada’s fortieth Parliament — the media re- ported an exciting development: the front doors opened. Reporters began to speculate that the meeting had been decisive, and an anxious na- tion awaited the Prime Minister’s appearance to announce the Governor General’s decision. But then, other than the descent of a few er- rant snowflakes, nothing happened. “It’s been 6 minutes since you reported the front door opened — what’s going on over there?” a des- perate commentator pleaded on the National Post’s live blog.2 For over thirty minutes the doors remained curiously ajar, and then — at 11:01 a.m. — they closed. When the Prime Minister finally did emerge nearly an hour after that, having spent a total of two and a half hours inside Rideau Hall, he informed Canadians that the Governor General had agreed to follow his advice and prorogue (or suspend) Parliament until 26 January 2009.
Authors who publish with Constitutional Forum constitutionnel grant the journal the right of first publication, and agree to license the work under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) that allows others to share the work for non-commercial purposes, with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal, as long as no changes are made to the original work. Please use this format to attribute this work to Constitutional Forum constitutionnel:
"First published as: Title of Article, Contributor, Constitutional Forum constitutionnel Volume/Issue, Copyright © [year], Publisher"