Abstract

The Supreme Court of Canada has changed its approach in dealing with the complex symbolic issues surrounding Quebec's role in the Canadian constitution as shown in two decisions: The Quebec Veto Reference and the Quebec Secession Reference . This paper argues that, in the matter of Quebec/Canada disputes, the court should, as they did in the second decision, see themselves more as a forum for public debate than as simply a place for rule imposition. Process-oriented suggestions as well as framing principles are therapeutically better answers in this matter