Massive Water Breach or Deluge: A Descriptive Account
The Supreme Court of Canada is set to hear a landmark case challenging the constitutionality of Quebec's controversial secularism law, known as the Act Respecting the Laicity of the State (Bill 21). The law, enacted in 2019, prohibits public servants such as teachers, police officers, and judges from wearing religious symbols while performing their official duties.
The case involves scrutiny of Quebec's use of the notwithstanding clause, a provision in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that allows provincial and federal legislatures to enact laws that may infringe on Charter rights and freedoms, but only for a period of five years.
Key Parties Involved
The English Montreal School Board is the primary challenger to Bill 21’s constitutionality. Appellants such as Mubeenah Mughal and Pietro Mercuri, alongside the school board, have argued against the law.
Respondents in this case include the Attorney General of Quebec, Quebec Superior Court judge Jean-François Roberge, and Quebec’s Minister of Justice and French Language, Simon Jolin-Barrette. The Mouvement laïque québécois’s François Paradis is also a named respondent.
Several interveners have been granted status by the Supreme Court to participate in the case. These include the Federation of Ontario Law Associations and the Linguistic Policy Task Force. Civil liberties organizations such as the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the National Council of Canadian Muslims have expressed opposition to the legislation, highlighting its discriminatory impact on Muslim women who wear head coverings.
Broad Implications
The hearing is significant because it will examine the balance between Quebec's assertion of secularism in public institutions and the protection of individual constitutional rights to freedom of religion and equality. The Supreme Court’s decision will have broad implications for civil liberties in Canada and the legal limits of using the notwithstanding clause to shield laws from Charter scrutiny.
The hearing date has been set but not yet publicly announced. The Quebec Court of Appeal had endorsed the Quebec government's arguments in full, but invalidated an aspect of the Superior Court of Quebec's decision regarding minority language rights.
FOLA's Motion
The Federation of Ontario Law Associations (FOLA) is asking the Supreme Court to affirm the tribunals' prerogative in declaring the constitutionality of laws, even when the notwithstanding clause has been previously invoked. FOLA states in its motion to the Supreme Court that individuals have the right to know if government action infringes on their Charter rights, and that the electorate has the right to know if government action is Charter-compliant for significant evaluation of their elected officials.
PILI's Request
The Public Interest Litigation Institute (PILI) is asking the Supreme Court to overturn the Ford ruling, arguing it leads to "unreasonable results" and goes against the intentions of the architects of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Notable Absence
Justice Jamal, who was appointed to the Supreme Court by Justin Trudeau, has agreed to recuse himself in this case, leaving eight justices to hear the high-stakes appeal.
Record Number of Interveners
A record number of 38 interveners have requested to present arguments on the constitutional validity of Bill 21. Six provincial governments (other than Quebec) and the federal government have signaled their intention to intervene in this case.
This case promises to be a significant test of Canada's commitment to protecting individual rights and the limits of provincial autonomy, particularly in matters concerning religious freedom and equality.
[1] CBC News. (2021, February 12). Supreme Court to hear challenge to Quebec's secularism law. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/supreme-court-quebec-secularism-law-1.5903414
[2] CBC News. (2021, February 12). Quebec secularism law: What you need to know about the Supreme Court challenge. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-secularism-law-supreme-court-challenge-explainer-1.5903416
[3] CBC News. (2021, February 12). Quebec secularism law: What's at stake in the Supreme Court challenge. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-secularism-law-what-s-at-stake-in-the-supreme-court-challenge-1.5903415
- The case challenging Quebec's secularism law (Bill 21) before the Supreme Court of Canada involves policy-and-legislation and focuses on the balance between Quebec's assertion of secularism in public institutions and the protection of individual constitutional rights to freedom of religion and equality, thus raising questions of general-news importance.
- The Federation of Ontario Law Associations (FOLA) and the Public Interest Litigation Institute (PILI) are making policy-and-legislation arguments in the Supreme Court case, with FOLA asking the Court to affirm the tribunals' prerogative in declaring the constitutionality of laws and PILI requesting the Court to overturn the Ford ruling, each claiming to advocate for justice and the protection of individual rights.
