Discriminatory legislation in Quebec met with a national shrug
As Canadians, we are taught from a young age that we possess certain inalienable rights and freedoms, and that the governments we elect have the responsibility of upholding and protecting them. A few months ago, however, Quebec’s Premier, Francois Legault, awoke many Canadians to the harsh reality that those same governments are also capable of stripping away our rights at a moment’s notice.
Given Quebec’s longstanding approach to secularism and its numerous attempts to legislate against minority religious practices, Premier Legault’s decision to ban public sector employees from wearing religious symbols did not surprise me. What was shocking, however, was his unapologetic use of the notwithstanding clause in order to prevent Bill 21 from challenge on Charter grounds. While previous Quebec governments have proposed similar pieces of legislation, none have gone so far as to include the notwithstanding clause. Premier Legault’s departure from the more cautious approach of previous governments points to a clear lack of regard for Charter rights, particularly those of religious minorities. Indeed, the use of the notwithstanding clause indicates that Premier Legault’s government was undoubtedly aware that Bill 21 likely violated the Charter, but remained undeterred from passing openly discriminatory legislation.
As a result of the passing of Bill 21, countless individuals with nowhere but Quebec to call home have suddenly found themselves as second-class citizens in a province which they believed respected and celebrated their diversity. Premier Legault has since tried to justify Bill 21 in the face of public outrage, claiming that it only impacts those members of visible religious minorities who choose to work in the public sector. But he has refused to account for the broader societal impact that this legislation is bound to have.
As many people have noted, Bill 21 is dangerous. What Bill 21 advances is a level of state-sanctioned atheism under the guise of secularism, as well as an overall fear or mistrust of visibly religious individuals. Secularism, or the separation of church and state, is not premised upon the eradication of religion in the public sphere. Rather, it requires a government to remain neutral on the topic of religion, allowing individuals to practice their faith without fear of state interference. By banning public sector employees from wearing religious symbols, the Quebec government has done the opposite. In fact, the Quebec government has painted religious minorities as the ‘other,’ sending Canadians the message that those who wear these items are somehow incapable of being impartial and thus cannot be entrusted with positions of authority.
What Premier Legault fails to comprehend, however, is that all individuals are biased regardless of whether they adhere to a particular faith, and that the removal of religious symbols does not, in turn, remove bias. Indeed, the fear that individuals wearing religious symbols will be unable to put their beliefs aside when acting in a professional capacity stems from a biased understanding of the nature and abilities of religious minorities.
While the leaders of all major federal political parties have expressed a degree of opposition to Bill 21 since its passing, none have unequivocally denounced the actions of the Quebec government. This weak reaction is something which Canadian human rights organizations, such as the World Sikh Organization of Canada, have found deeply troubling. Though it may no doubt be argued that such a move by the federal government would amount to an attempt to interfere with provincial matters, I find it interesting that the federal government, and members of the NDP, have had no problem criticizing Premier Ford’s actions in Ontario. A more likely explanation for this lack of response is the upcoming federal election, and the fact that all three parties are looking to win support in Quebec. The problem, however, is that all three parties’ refusals to take a hard stance on such an openly discriminatory piece of legislation shows Canadians that Quebec is free to do as it wishes, and that winning the federal election takes priority over defending the rights and freedoms of Canadians.
If there is one thing I have learned from the passing of Bill 21, it is that we cannot afford to become complacent in matters involving our rights. It is time for ordinary citizens to demand more from their elected officials, and for the leaders of our law schools to use their expertise in order to devise strategies aimed at preventing politicians from undermining the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As for Premier Legault and his government, all I ask is that they learn to embrace Canadian values—namely, freedom of religion and acceptance of diversity.