How a ban on religious symbols has triggered a Canadian constitutional debate

BBC:

A controversial secularism law in Quebec is heading to Canada’s Supreme Court – but the outcome will impact much more than religious expression in Canada, legal experts say.

The case has the potential to test national unity and the balance between courts and elected officials.

“This case is probably going to be the most important constitutional case in a generation,” said Christine Van Geyn, executive director at the Canadian Constitution Foundation.

At the heart of the case is Bill 21, which bars civil servants like judges, police officers and teachers from wearing religious symbols at work. It was passed in 2019, by the governing Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ).

But to withstand legal challenges, legislators employed a unique Canadian invention, the controversial “notwithstanding clause”. That legal loophole allows governmentsto override certain constitutional rights, including freedom of religion and equality rights.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) called Quebec’s arguments in court “spine-chilling”.

“Could a government invoke [the clause] to ban abortion? To criminalise political speech critical of the government? To legalise torture?” the CCLA wrote in a recent op-ed in French-language newspaper Le Devoir.

“According to the Quebec government’s logic, even in such cases, the courts would not only be powerless but also bound to silence.”

On Monday, the court will begin four days of hearings on a constitutional challenge to Bill 21,with more than 50 interveners including the federal government.