Security Vs freedom of Religion 

by Eva Castro on December 3, 2017 - 1:38am

 

Security Vs Freedom of Religion 

The article ''The tenuous constitutionality of bill 62'' by Carissima Mathen gives information and the negative impact of this new law in Quebec. The article says that the bill 62 enforces the removal of face covering in public services such as public transit. This does not apply to only those who give the service but those who receive the service. The obvious problem with this law is the fact that the category of 'face covering' does not stop at masks, it puts niqab on the same category. This law implies that women with religions that require them to wear niqabs will not be allowed to use them. This could lead to a lot of problems such as a woman wearing a niqab having to choose between having access to public services or her religion. The article informs us that a lot of people have reported that the law is inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. There are some ways a person affected by this law could lunch a challenge and a legal framework would take place. The article tells us that the individual would have some challenges to prove their point. First the individual must show that the law interferes with their freedom of religion guaranteed by section 2 of the Charter. Then, the next step is to argue that in its effect if not its intent that the law violates the charter. Sadly, the article also says that even if a person can justify the fact that the law jeopardizes their rights it could take a long amount of time before something is put in place. The article informs us of another view on niqab, this one being negative because in their opinion face covering conveys a negative message about women in general. In my opinion the law was put in place without thinking of all the possibilities or problems that could come with this new law. While I understand those who believe that if they talk or give a person a service they should both be able to see the other's face, making it mandatory is not the right way to approach this issue. I believe that the law affects the freedom of religion of some individuals and is going against Canada's reputation and stand on multiculturalism. I think that in the way of prioritizing security and religion neutralization, it has been forgotten that for some covering their face is a way of life and part of who they are. If Canada is a multicultural country, is the bill 62 going against their values since it prevents a certain group from practicing their religion?

 

 

Carissima Mathen, '' The tenuous constitutionality of bill 62.'' policy options, October 23, 2017,http://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/october-2017/the-tenuous-constitutionality-of-bill-62/. December 12, 2017