The decision of the Court of Appeal to validate almost in its entirety the law on religious neutrality is a “victory across the board” for Quebec, defenders of secularism trumpeted on Thursday. Losers in this affair, the groups opposed to Bill 21 are studying a possible appeal, which the federal government intends to support.
Lawyer Guillaume Rousseau was over the moon Thursday afternoon, a few minutes after the judgment was released. From the Court of Appeal building in Montreal, the one who represented the Quebec Secular Movement (MLQ) in its course in second instance welcomed the court’s decision to once again subject teachers in the English-speaking school network to the main provisions of “Law 21”.
“It’s a victory across the board for those who defend secularism and it’s a victory more broadly for Quebec,” he said. About two hours later, in a speech to the media, Prime Minister François Legault used the same words to describe the judgment.
“The Court has just confirmed Quebec’s right to make its own decisions. It’s really a great victory for the Quebec nation,” rejoiced the CAQ elected official, almost five years after having the controversial legislative text adopted at the Salon Bleu. “Secularism is a principle that unites us […], in Quebec. »
In April 2021, through trial judge Marc-André Blanchard, the Superior Court of Quebec invalidated the portions of the law which prohibited school board teachers from wearing religious symbols in class. An “error” which had the effect of creating “a State within a State”, according to Me Rousseau.
Like the Attorney General of Quebec and the group For the Rights of Women (PDF) of Quebec, the lawyer asked the Court of Appeal to overturn the first instance decision. At the time of appealing the judgment, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General Simon Jolin-Barrette also criticized Judge Blanchard for creating “two Quebecs”.
Ottawa ready to intervene
In the middle of question period, Thursday, the federal Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Arif Virani, recalled that his government was ready to “intervene” in the Supreme Court of Canada if groups ever appealed the decision.
“Our government is firmly committed to defending the rights and freedoms protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On several occasions, our government has clearly expressed serious concerns regarding the preventive use of the notwithstanding provision,” he insisted from the Commons.
The English Montreal School Board, which had defended its achievements in the Court of Appeal in 2022, unsurprisingly said it was “disappointed” on Thursday with the turn of events. Its president, Joe Ortona, however, did not want to say whether he would turn to the Supreme Court to invalidate the law.
“ [C’est] an option, but I will not decide after ten minutes like the Minister of Justice did [Jolin-Barrette] in first instance,” he said, in reference to the decision of the Quebec government to appeal Judge Blanchard’s decision a few moments after its publication, in 2021.
“We were confident that the court would rule in our favour. Religion and religious freedom are an aspect of culture that we have the right to manage in our schools,” Ortona added in English. “My heart is with the teachers. »
Also intervening in the Court of Appeal, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association said it was “determined [e] to exercise all necessary legal remedies, including seeking leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.”
“Parliamentary sovereignty clause”
Apart from its few provisions on the wearing of religious symbols by elected representatives of the National Assembly, the Law on State Secularism has been validated across the board by the Court of Appeal. The use of the notwithstanding provision to protect a law from the Canadian and Quebec charters of rights and freedoms is also enshrined by the highest court of Quebec.
“The government, it is important to say, will continue to use the parliamentary sovereignty clause as long as it is necessary for Canada to recognize the choices of the Quebec nation,” said Prime Minister Legault, THURSDAY. Three weeks ago, his minister responsible for Secularism, Jean-François Roberge, tabled a bill to renew the use of the derogation provision for five years.
Although he said he was satisfied with the conclusion of the Court of Appeal on Thursday, the Prime Minister gave a completely different speech last week regarding the independence of his magistrates. When appealing the decision of the court of second instance on asylum seekers’ access to subsidized daycare, he saw fit to point out that the judges of the Court of Appeal are appointed in Ottawa. At the same time, he accused the PQ leader, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, of putting himself “flat on his stomach before the federal government” by not supporting the government’s legal action.
An electoral issue?
The leader of the Bloc Québécois, Yves-François Blanchet, now believes that the issue of Bill 21 “will have a very central place” in the political debate during the next federal elections. He describes as “odious” the fact of raising public funds to challenge this Quebec law.
“The Bloc Québécois has been trying to present this for two elections as a scarecrow,” replied Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly, who was also co-president of the Liberal campaign in 2021. According to her, it is “the responsibility of any good federal government” to “protect the right to equality, the right to religion […] in short, all the different rights which are affected by law 21”.
With Benoit Valois-Nadeau and Boris Proulx