At Quebec secularism bill hearings, government challenged to say why trampling religious rights is necessary

After spending all day hearing fromdefenders of his secularism bill, Quebec Immigration MinisterSimon Jolin-Barrettewas confrontedTuesday evening with a challenge from a wispy-haired, 87-year-old philosopher.

"We are still waiting for an explanation about why this is necessary," Charles Taylor toldJolin-Barretteat legislative hearing in Quebec City.

If passed, the bill would bar Quebec civil servants in positions of authorityincluding public teachers, police officers and Crown prosecutors from wearing garments like thekippa or hijab while at work.

Just over a decade ago, Taylor and sociologist Gerard Bouchard co-authored a landmark government study into how best to accommodate religious minorities.

In response to Taylor's challenge, Jolin-Barretteargued that large parts of his bill wereinspired by the Bouchard-Taylor report. But Taylor replied they never recommended stripping teachers of the right to wear religious symbols.

"No right is without a limit," Taylor said. He added, though, that trampling on fundamental rights such as religious freedom required a good reason, something the government had yet to provide.

That pointwas echoed in later testimony by Quebec's human rights commission and theCentre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, one of only two religious groups invited to speak at the hearings.

"We don't think the government has demonstrated that there is a serious threat to secularism in Quebec," saidDan-Michal Abcassis of CIJA.

Taylorhas since backed away from one of the most discussed recommendations of the 2008 report, which suggested that police and judges not be allowed to display signs of their faith.

Watch Charles Taylor arguewhyBill 21 has a particular impact on Muslim women:

Bill 21 must be seen in context of Islamophobia, Charles Taylor says

5 years ago

Duration 0:59

While Bill 21 does not target one religion specifically, Charles Taylor argues it must be understood in the context of a society "full of Islamophobia."

He changed his mind, he said, when he saw the consequences of proposing limits on religious expression.

"Campaigning on this issue stirs up hate," Taylor said. "You can't exaggeratethe alienation this causes for minorities."

Taylor testified alongsideJocelyn Maclure, a Universit Laval philosopher who also worked on theBouchard-Taylor report.Maclure issued his own challenge to the government:produce studies that show religious symbols by themselves lead to conversion.

"I'm still waiting to see those studies because they don't exist,"Maclure said.

Muslim women equated with 'fundamentalists'

The two philosophers were the first critics of the bill to appear before the committee onthe first of six days of hearings into the draft legislation.

All the groups who testified to that point backed the bill, even suggesting it go further. They want to see it applied to private school teachers and daycare workers.

Some of these groups didn't hesitate to use fiery language to describe the danger of not passing strict limits on religious symbols in the civil service.

Djemila Benhabib, an outspoken secularism advocate, equatedMuslim women who refuse to remove their hijab at work with extremists.

"Women who wear the hijab are engaging in emotional blackmailwhen they say they won't take it off. I consider them to be fundamentalists," saidBenhabib, who represent a group called Collectif citoyen pour l'galit et la lacit.

(Premier Franois Legaultdisagreed withBenhabib'scharacterization, saying:"Let's be careful with the labels.")

Another group speaking for secular North Africans tabled a document that said women who wear the hijab"aren't really Muslim."

The Liberalsecularism critic,Hlne David, asked the group what they thoughtabout women who wear the hijab by choice.

"You don't understand indoctrination," she was told by FeridChikhi.

Will government make concessions?

The Coalition AvenirQubec has a strong majority, and has indicated it wants to pass by the bill by the end of June.

But Legaulthas alsosaid he wants to build broader support among the opposition parties, if possible. So far, only the Parti Quboishas expressed any openness.

The price of their support, the PQ interim leader said Tuesday, is extending the bill to private schools and daycares, as well as clarifying how it will be enforced.

Jolin-Barrette, the bill's sponsor,told reporters before the hearings began that the government wouldn't negotiate on a number of points. Chief among them, he said, was the bill's invocation of the notwithstanding clause.

That would protect the eventual lawfrom court challenges based on claims it violates religious freedoms.

Along with the measures targeting teachers, the use of the nothwithstandingclause is arguablythe bill's most controversial feature, roundly denounced by legal experts and civil rights advocates.

Jolin-Barretteopened the hearings by addressing the widespread criticism the draft legislation has attracted. He said the 2018 election gavethe government a clear mandate to move forward with its proposals.

"The government of Quebec is convinced it has found the right balance between individual rights and collective rights," he said.