The State Secularism Act does not respect English-speakers in Quebec who have cultural diversity in their DNA, the English-Montreal School Board (EMSB) argued in the Court of Appeal on Wednesday morning.
According to the EMSB, the Law undoubtedly violates section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which provides for the right to education in the minority language: “Bill 21”, adopted in 2019, is therefore unconstitutional.
Since Monday, numerous groups and entities have appeared before the highest court in the province. Their objective ? Convince the Court of Appeal to overturn the decision of Judge Marc-André Blanchard, who in 2021 had largely upheld the Lawcommonly referred to as “Law 21.”
The legislative measure of the government of François Legault prohibits the wearing of religious symbols by several state employees in the exercise of their functions, including teachers in public elementary and secondary schools, police officers, judges and Crown prosecutors .
The EMSB won its case: Judge Blanchard ruled in its favour, arguing that section 23 had been violated, and therefore exempting employees and teachers of English school boards from “Bill 21”. They can therefore continue to wear the yarmulke, hijab or turban at work.
The Government of Quebec appealed this portion of the judgment.
According to him, section 23 only guarantees language rights and “Bill 21” does not interfere with those of Anglophones in Quebec. It has nothing to do with language, argued Quebec on Tuesday.
The EMSB reiterated in the Court of Appeal its argument which had won before Justice Blanchard: section 23 has been interpreted over the years as including the “power of management and control” of school boards, which includes policies hiring and promoting staff.
“Law 21” prevents them from hiring teachers who wear religious symbols, it was argued.
This broad conception of the linguistic rights of minorities includes the protection of culture, continued Ms.e Perri Ravon on behalf of the EMSB.
She based her argument on various passages from a few Supreme Court of Canada decisions that link language and culture when it comes to the protection of linguistic minority communities. One of them states — a 1990 Supreme Court ruling on the rights of Francophones in Alberta — that “management and control” are vital “to ensure the flourishing of their language and culture. »
The protection granted to these minority groups goes beyond language, insists Ms.e Raven. “There is an element of culture conveyed by the language but it does not exhaust the whole notion. »
“English school boards see Bill 21 as an affront to their culture and their values,” she added. The lawyer goes even further, arguing that “Bill 21” is detrimental to the integration and success of minority students, and will thus frustrate the efforts of English school boards, which are doing a number of things to promote diversity.
As for M.e Julius Grey, who represents the Quebec Community Groups Netwoks, argued that it is not up to the majority in Quebec to dictate what the minority culture is.
The pleadings continue with other topics determined by the Court of Appeal, including eligibility for provincial elections.