Quebec’s Bill 21: An Overview

Drafted in 2019 by Simon Jolin-Barrette, a member of the Coalition Avenir Quebec, and passed that June, Quebec’s Bill 21 seeks to affirm state laicity through four principles: “separation between state and religion, state neutrality in religion, equality of all citizens (especially between women and men), and freedom of conscience and religion (art.1).” The bill thus proposes the restriction of visible religious symbols in the public sector– essentially banning public office holders from wearing visible religious symbolism and imagery while they carry out their professional duties. The ban applies to religious symbols like hijabs, yarmulkes, and crucifixes. Teachers working in English schools are exempt from the ban. 

Formerly known as “An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State,” the Bill seeks to reinforce secularism in Quebec by banning visible religious symbols for public service actors including school teachers and police officers. This bill and the provisions which it puts forth have been met with controversy, with many questioning the constitutionality of this piece of Québecois legislation. Those opposed to the bill argue that Bill 21 disproportionately affects Muslim women and other religious minorities, contributing to the systematic marginalization of these groups.

Since its passing in June 2019, Bill 21 has been appealed and challenged, especially by Canadian civil rights organizations who argue that the bill is discriminatory, unconstitutional, and in direct opposition to some of the basic rights and freedoms outlined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Bill has undergone certain minor amendments since its passing, but these changes are mostly semantic, as the bill remains largely the same today as it was the day it was passed. Many argue that the bill is disproportionately affects already marginalized religious minorities. These groups have been vocal about the ways in which they feel their rights have been violated and have taken to protest and demonstration to argue the bill’s unconstitutionality and anachronistic nature. 

The courts are limited in what they can do, as Canada’s notwithstanding clause, which limits the court’s power to strike down legislation, was used by Quebec to insulate Bill 21 from court rulings which would have an adverse effect on the bill’s intent of safeguarding secularism. The application of the notwithstanding clause has sparked controversy and has made repealing and amending the bill significantly more difficult. 

Though Bill 21 has been met with national controversy and opposition, there exists a significant number of people who support the bill, and believe that it is a viable piece of legislation conducive to ensuring that Quebec remains a secular state. The Montreal Gazette conducted a poll to investigate public opinion regarding the Bill, noting that  “[w]hile 59 per cent of Canadians disapprove, a total of 41 per cent in the same category (four in 10) approve of the law with a quarter of that group (26 per cent) saying they strongly approve. The poll says the opposite is true in Quebec, where 64 percent approve of the bill. Only 35 per cent say they disapprove.” So while there is clear opposition to the bill and the contents which it legislates, a significant proportion of Quebecois approve of the bill in its entirety. 

On the other hand, a large camp believes that Bill 21 violates the religious freedoms guaranteed and outlined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and also disproportionately affects already marginalized groups. By contrast there exists  a large group of individuals who believe that Bill 21 is a beneficial and necessary measure which ensures that the Province of Quebec remains secular. In Professor Mario Polèse’s analysis of Bill 21, he notes: 

Think of a car full of Jewish teenagers (with relatives in Israel) stopped by a female police officer wearing a hijab, or a car full of Muslim teenagers (with relatives in Palestine) stopped by a male police officer wearing a kippah. Think of a Bahá’í student whose relatives were killed by Muslim extremists in Iran having a teacher who wears a hijab. Think of Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims from South Asia whose relatives experienced massacres by Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims. Think of an old Cree man who suffered a decade of sexual abuse in a residential school arriving in Montreal for a colonoscopy and being confronted by health providers wearing crosses. 

Polèse’s analysis is representative of the values and opinions of many Quebecers, who argue that Bill 21 safeguards Quebec, and the people of Quebec, from religious interference in the workplace, or when carrying out duties, and seeks to reinforce the principles of secularism on which Quebec depends. Secularism is a deep-rooted aspect of Quebecois culture, and many fear this being taken away or undermined. 



Alexander BeckComment