"Canada is a secular democracy."
In their joint factum to the Supreme Court of Canada, the BC Humanist Association (BCHA) and Canadian Secular Alliance (CSA) argue that the state's duty of religious neutrality is an integral part of the Canada's Charter.
The BCHA and CSA are intervenors in the legal battle over Quebec's Law 21 that banned certain public sector employees from wearing religious symbols. The Government of Quebec controversially invoked the notwithstanding clause in an effort to shield the law from judicial scrutiny. Both groups have long opposed the law, arguing it undermines individual freedom of religion and expression.
In their arguments, filed with the court yesterday, the groups argue that the duty of neutrality is not simply a corollary to freedom of religion but an inherent aspect of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It is an unwritten constitutional principle that is necessary to the coherence of, and flowing by implication from, the Charter's architecture.
They write that "the duty of religious neutrality is baked into the Charter" and therefore "is not affected by an invocation" of the notwithstanding clause.
The parties further argue that Law 21's religious symbols ban is "legally incoherent" as "the state is simply not competent to determine matters of religion." The Supreme Court of Canada has previously said that the government cannot become "the arbiter of religious dogma"; bureaucrats cannot determine what constitutes a "religious" symbol versus a cultural, political or other type of symbol.
The case features a record number of intervenors and a hearing will likely be scheduled for later this year or early 2026, with a decision to come roughly six months after that.
The BCHA & CSA are represented by Wes McMillan of AMLC. Follow the BCHA's other legal work.
Donate to support the costs of this vital legal intervention.