Will Quebec’s right to self-determination in matters of secularism be recognized?

Nadia El-Mabrouk & six cosigners, board members of RPL: Etienne-Alexis Boucher, Marie-Claude Girard, François Dugré, Lyne Jubinville, Raphaël Guérard and Lucie Jobin

The Rassemblement pour la laïcité acknowledges the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the complaint to invalidate the State Secularism Act. We will be alongside our member associations, the Mouvement laïque québécois (MLQ) and Droits collectifs Québec (DCQ), as well as Pour les droits des femmes du Québec (PDFQ), who will be intervenors in these proceedings.

Recall that in February 2024, the Quebec Court of Appeal issued a detailed and comprehensive judgment concluding that the law was constitutional and that the use of the notwithstanding clause was valid. In addition, this judgment overturned the Superior Court’s judgment concerning English-Montreal, ruling—which in our opinion is obvious—that language rights cannot be invoked to invalidate the application of the law in English-language public schools.

In response to the accusation of discrimination regarding the ban on teachers wearing religious symbols, the Court of Appeal’s judgment eloquently explains that these people are “the face of the public education mission that the Quebec State has given itself,” that they “embody authority in public sector educational institutions,” and that this is why they are asked to “refrain from wearing religious symbols in the exercise of [their] functions.” But outside of their classrooms, women wearing the hijab, niqab or burqa “are free to wear such clothing because of their religious beliefs,” “have full access to State or para-State space,” and to “public space in general, where the wearing of religious symbols is permitted without restriction.”

How can the judges of the Supreme Court fail to make the same observation? And how can we not deplore the fact that the Fédération autonome de l’enseignement (FAE) continues its fight to allow teachers to enjoy the privilege of displaying their religious symbols in class?

Recall that in the judgment of MLQ v. City of Saguenay, the Supreme Court ruled that there is discrimination when, in the exercise of their functions, State representatives profess, adopt or promote a belief to the exclusion of others.

We expect the Supreme Court to validate the Quebec law, whose purpose, as the Court of Appeal judgment clearly states, is to find a “compromise between collective rights, individual rights and the desire to strengthen the principle of the religious neutrality of the State, elevated under the term ‘State secularism’” to the rank of a preponderant element of the Quebec legal order.”

We hope that this judgment will be an opportunity to settle, once and for all, the fundamental question: that the State Secularism Act is a legitimate choice by Quebec which, far from infringing on fundamental rights, provides Quebecers of all origins with secular public services.