2024-03-01 03:54:40
This is an important legal victory for the Legault government: the Quebec Court of Appeal on Thursday confirmed the constitutionality of the State Secularism Act and validated its application in English-speaking school boards.
After 15 months of deliberations, the highest court in the province rendered its verdict in a judgment of some 300 pages (New window).
Magistrates Manon Savard, Yves-Marie Morissette and Marie-France Bich not only validated the decision rendered in April 2021 by the Superior Court, but also concluded that the Law on State Secularism – better known as the “Bill 21” – does not violate the linguistic rights of English-speaking school boards.
Another nuance: the court ruled in favor of trial judge Marc-André Blanchard regarding the exclusion of deputies of the National Assembly from the application of the law.
In other words, the Court of Appeal considered that elected officials should have the right to wear religious symbols, unlike other representatives of the State in positions of authority such as judges, Crown prosecutors, prison guards, police officers, school principals and teachers.
The use of the “notwithstanding clause” validated
Adopted in June 2019, “Law 21”, which prohibits several categories of Quebec state employees from wearing religious symbols in the exercise of their duties, has caused controversy for almost five years, both in Quebec and in the other Canadian provinces. Its opponents argue in particular that it contravenes the Canadian and Quebec charters of rights and freedoms.
To shield its law from any prosecution, the Legault government preemptively invoked the derogation provision (also called “derogation clause” or “notwithstanding clause”) of the Constitution, a use validated by judges Savard, Morissette and Bich.
The Court is not empowered to rule on whether the Act infringes on the freedoms of religion and expression or the right to equality guaranteed by the charters, they write.
Since invocation of the exemption provision must be renewed every five years, Minister Jean-François Roberge tabled Bill 52 earlier this month. Its adoption, likely, should allow the Legault government to subtract the ” law 21” to any legal challenge for five more years.
Interview with Louis-Philippe Lampron, full professor at the Faculty of Law of Laval University and specialist in constitutional law
In a short press briefing Thursday, Quebec Premier François Legault declared that the Court of Appeal’s decision constitutes a great victory for the Quebec nation.
The Quebec government will continue to use the notwithstanding clause for as long as necessary for Canada to recognize the social choices of the Quebec nation. It’s non-negotiable.
In the same vein, Simon Jolin-Barrette affirmed on ICI RDI that it was not necessarily obvious that this case would go to the Supreme Court.
For us, the case is ultimately closed. It’s a victory all round. We have just recognized the sovereignty of the Parliament of Quebec, rejoiced the Minister of Justice of Quebec.
The CAQ also prefers to use the expression parliamentary sovereignty provision instead of derogation provision, since this provision serves to enforce the will of the people.
Towards an appeal to the Supreme Court
Much awaited, the judgment rendered Thursday rules on a total of eight appeals. Interested parties were heard in November 2022.
We are obviously disappointed, declared the president of the English Montreal School Board (CSEM), Joe Ortona, in the minutes following the publication of the judgment. An appeal is still on the table, he admitted, referring to the possibility that the Supreme Court of Canada will be seized of the case.
The EMSB, however, will take the time to read the judgment before making a decision, warned Mr. Ortona. We must base ourselves on legal principles and not on emotions, he argued.
However, if the case goes to the Supreme Court, the federal government will certainly make itself heard, confirmed Canada’s Minister of Justice, Arif Virani, at a press briefing.
This will be an opportunity for the Trudeau government to defend the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as its vision of the “notwithstanding clause”, which should be a tool of last resort and not of first resort, argued Minister Virani.
Open in full screen mode
Federal Justice Minister Arif Virani declared Thursday that the ins and outs of the debate regarding the constitutionality of the Quebec State Secularism Act make it a “national issue.”
Photo: The Canadian Press / Justin Tang
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also said that if and when [cette question] ends up in the Supreme Court, the Liberal government will intervene.
Conversely, the Quebec Secular Movement welcomed the decision of the Court of Appeal on Thursday. It is a victory across the board for all those who defend secularism and it is a victory more broadly for Quebec. […] in his ability to make his choices, summarized lawyer Guillaume Rousseau.
According to Me Rousseau, the Supreme Court should refuse to hear the appeal since the arguments of the Court of Appeal are “concrete”.
In Ottawa, three political parties are in favor of a referral to the Supreme Court, namely the Liberal Party of Canada (PLC), the Conservative Party of Canada (PCC) and the New Democratic Party (NDP). The Bloc Québécois opposes it.
1709270178
#Quebec #Court #Appeal #validates #Law #State #Secularism
