This Act authorizes the Commissioner in Executive Council to issue orders, registered as regulations, that temporarily adjust dates, deadlines and other statutory time periods across Northwest Territories Acts when those timelines cannot reasonably be met because of pandemic-related operational changes. The power is purpose-built to avoid automatic legal and administrative consequences—missed limitation periods, expiry of rights, lapses in filing requirements—that would otherwise flow from COVID-19 disruptions.
The Act centralizes quick temporal relief in the executive branch while building in a short notice requirement to a legislative committee and a set of narrow limits on which statutes may not be altered. For compliance officers and counsel, the bill creates a new, territory-wide mechanism to pause or reshape statutory timelines without separate amendments to each affected Act — and therefore a new source of change to track when advising on deadlines and litigation strategy.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill creates a delegated power giving the Commissioner in Executive Council authority to make orders—implemented as regulations—that substitute or adjust statutory dates, deadlines and time periods for a temporary period to address COVID-19 related operational constraints.
Who It Affects
Territorial departments that administer statutes, regulated parties with statutory filing or appeal timelines, legal practitioners, and administrative tribunals that adjudicate time-sensitive rights and obligations are directly affected.
Why It Matters
Instead of amending dozens of Acts individually, the executive can deliver targeted temporal relief quickly; that shifts where and how statutory certainty is managed and places a higher premium on monitoring regulations and government publications for changes to legal deadlines.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act gives the Commissioner in Executive Council a targeted, temporary tool to change statutory timelines across Northwest Territories law when COVID-19 has made compliance impracticable. Orders made under the Act are regulations; they substitute different dates or time periods for those specified in an Act and remain in force only for the temporary duration the Act allows.
Before an order can take effect the government must provide a copy to the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight and wait seven days. The statute treats that as a single notice event even if the order is later amended — the government does not need to repeat the seven-day notice every time it alters the draft.
The Act does not give the committee a veto; the requirement is notice and a short delay designed to allow committee members to see the proposed change before it is registered.The Act sets three important floor rules. First, an order may be made retroactive but only back to March 24, 2020, at the earliest.
Second, the authority to adjust timelines expressly cannot be used to change the timelines in this Act itself or in three named statutes that protect privacy and the Legislature’s institutional arrangements. Third, orders must be time-limited: each order lasts for the period it specifies or until six months after the Act receives assent, whichever comes first.Finally, the Act requires publication of any order both on a government website and in Part II of the Northwest Territories Gazette.
That places the onus on the government to make the change public, but it also means regulated parties and counsel must monitor official publications closely; the Act does not create individual notice requirements for affected private parties beyond those publication steps.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Commissioner in Executive Council may, by order registered as a regulation, substitute a different date, deadline or time period for one prescribed in a Northwest Territories Act.
An order cannot be made until seven days after a copy is provided to the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight, and that single notice suffices even if the order is later amended.
Orders may be made retroactive but no earlier than March 24, 2020.
The power cannot be used to alter timelines in this Act or in the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, the Health Information Act, or the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act.
An order remains in effect only for the period it specifies or until six months after the Act receives assent (whichever is earlier), and must be published on a government website and in Part II of the Northwest Territories Gazette.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Purpose — temporary relief for COVID-19 disruptions
Section 1 sets the statutory objective: to mitigate legal and administrative consequences that flow from pandemic-related operational changes by allowing temporary adjustment of statutory timelines. Practically, this frames the orders as remedial and exceptional rather than a permanent rewrite of underlying policy choices embedded in primary legislation.
Authority to adjust statutory dates; notice and exclusions
Subsection 2(1) is the operative delegation: the Commissioner in Executive Council may, by order, replace a date or deadline in an Act with an alternative. Subsection 2(2) requires the government to give the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight a copy of a proposed order and to wait seven days before making it; subsection 2(3) clarifies that one such notice suffices even if the order is later amended. Subsection 2(4) carves out three statutes and the Act itself from the order power, preserving certain privacy and legislative-procedure timelines from executive variation.
Content scope, retroactivity and temporal limits
Section 3(1) allows orders to be general or specific, to include transitional provisions, and to be retroactive only as far back as March 24, 2020. Section 3(2) caps duration: an order lasts for its stated period or until six months after assent to this Act. Those mechanics limit how far and for how long executive temporal relief can reach, while allowing flexibility to tailor relief to particular statutes or cohorts.
Publication requirement
Section 4 requires that orders be published both on a government website and in Part II of the Northwest Territories Gazette. This creates formal avenues for public notice and legal discoverability of altered timelines, but it relies on centralized publication rather than individual notice to affected persons.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Territorial departments and program administrators — gain centralized, rapid authority to pause or extend statutory obligations without seeking separate amendments to each enabling statute, smoothing service delivery and compliance during the pandemic.
- Individuals and businesses with imminent statutory filings or appeal deadlines — receive breathing room where orders extend or substitute deadlines and prevent automatic loss of rights due to pandemic-related disruption.
- Administrative tribunals and courts — may see fewer procedural default motions and emergency filings if timelines are adjusted to reflect operational limits, reducing immediate caseload pressure.
- Legal and compliance teams — benefit from a single instrument to monitor for territory-wide deadline changes rather than tracking ad hoc amendments across dozens of statutes.
Who Bears the Cost
- Regulated parties that rely on fixed deadlines for certainty (creditors, permitting authorities, administrators) — face legal uncertainty while orders are in force because timelines they rely on may shift without prior notice to each stakeholder.
- Small organizations and self-represented litigants — bear the operational burden of monitoring government publications and may miss changes that affect their rights or obligations.
- Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight — acquires a rapid review role but only a seven-day window with no express veto, increasing pressure on committee capacity to scrutinize orders quickly.
- Courts and tribunals — must reconcile retroactive alterations with existing cases and may face complex evidentiary or jurisdictional questions where parties acted based on original statutory timelines.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between the need for swift, flexible relief from COVID-19’s operational disruptions and the constitutional and rule-of-law principle that changes to statutory rights and deadlines should run through transparent, deliberative legislative processes; the Act privileges administrative speed and breadth at the expense of fuller legislative scrutiny and individualized notice.
The Act answers a practical problem—how to prevent pandemic disruption from producing immediate legal loss—by delegating temporal adjustments to the executive. That delegation raises classic separation-of-powers and rule-of-law concerns: replacing legislated timelines is a substantive change, and shifting those changes into regulations limits the deliberative pathway and parliamentary record that a statute amendment would produce.
The seven-day notice to a legislative committee is a limited check; the committee receives information but lacks an express power to block an order, and a single notice rule means subsequent amendments do not trigger renewed committee review.
Retroactivity and the six-month ceiling create additional trade-offs. Allowing retroactive relief back to March 24, 2020 protects people whose rights already lapsed during the early pandemic, but retroactivity can upset settled expectations and complicate adjudication of matters already decided under the original timelines.
The publication requirement centralizes notice but does not require individualized service; affected parties with limited capacity to monitor official publications risk losing rights or incurring penalties. Finally, operational implementation is non-trivial: the government must identify every statute and administrative regime that relies on a statutory timeline, draft orders that avoid unintended interactions with other legal regimes, and coordinate departments and tribunals to apply the temporary changes coherently.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.