Prayer rooms remain banned in public schools in Quebec — at least, for now. A judge on Wednesday morning rejected the request of those who demanded the immediate suspension, before trial, of the decree which prevents schools from providing such rooms to students.
However, this challenge to the CAQ decree is not over: it was only a step in the process. The case will now follow its course and there will eventually be a full trial which will examine its constitutionality.
Those who oppose the decree will again have the opportunity to argue that it is discriminatory and contrary to freedom of religion, a fundamental right protected by the charters of rights and freedoms. According to the National Council of Canadian Muslims (CNMC) and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CLAC), which are leading the protest, the measure disproportionately affects students of the Muslim faith.
The case was argued Tuesday before Judge Lukasz Granosik of the Superior Court, at the Montreal courthouse.
In his judgment, the magistrate said he was convinced that students who wish to pray during school hours have suffered “irreparable harm” since the decree was issued. A 16-year-old Muslim boy explained in an affidavit that he now had to hide to pray on the grounds of his secondary school at lunchtime.
The decree was adopted this spring because the CAQ government believes that the presence of such premises is simply not compatible with the principle of secularism of the Quebec state. “School is not a place of prayer,” said Minister of Education Bernard Drainville at the time. The Montreal school where the young person studies did not contest the request for suspension, choosing to “defer to justice. »
In his orally delivered judgment, Judge Granosik said there is a “head-on collision” over “the use of public school space between the prohibition of overt prayers and religious practice. »
He recalled that a court should intervene to suspend immediately and before trial, a law or other governmental measure, only in “exceptional circumstances. The task was therefore very difficult for the student and the protesting groups, and they failed. On Wednesday, the ACLC said it was disappointed with the decision, but wanted to analyze it in more detail before commenting further.
To obtain the suspension requested, there must also be “a real urgency” which requires the immediate intervention of a judge. Here, the magistrate does not see it: two months passed before the groups appeared in court. Judge Granosik also recalled that the school holidays begin in a few days. There will be no infringement of rights during this summer period, he believes.
The courts must protect fundamental rights, he continues, but not modify or correct social policies, nor estimate which measures are better able to serve the public interest: this role belongs to elected officials, he recalls. And if the intervention of justice is possible in obvious cases, this one is not one. The constitutionality of the decree will therefore have to be examined in depth, after a trial where all the evidence can be presented.