Montreal's English school board is asking the Supreme Court to overturn Quebec's amendment to the Canadian constitution affirming that Quebecers form a nation whose common language is French.
• Also read: The State Secularism Act was upheld by the Court of Appeal, a victory for Quebec
• Also read: Monolingualism: a historic number of complaints against Air Canada and Michael Rousseau
The highly militant English school board was back in court on Friday after losing an appeal court battle the day before to avoid applying the secularism law.
This time, English-Montreal is contesting the reform of Bill 101, passed in 2022 by Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette.
However, his demands go far beyond the new obligations of Bill 96.
In fact, English-Montreal is calling for the repeal of Article 166 of the reform, which enshrined in the Canadian Constitution that “Quebecers shall constitute a nation” with French as the only official and common language.
According to her, the National Assembly acted outside its provincial jurisdiction by unilaterally amending the Canadian Constitution.
“If we want to attack a law, I think it is logical to attack it from all sides where there are weaknesses, that is, to use all possible arguments,” explains the president of the school board, Joe Ortona, in an interview with ours Parliamentarian Office.
fears
He fears that this precedent will one day allow Quebec to amend the article of the Canadian Charter that protects the rights of linguistic minorities.
“If Quebec believes it can unilaterally change the Canadian constitution, what is to stop it from abolishing Article 23 of the Charter and saying: We alone will decide that the article does not apply in Quebec,” argues Joe Ortona.
Free photo
The same fear applies to Article 133, which provides for bilingualism for parliamentary and court documents, he said.
For constitutional law professor Patrick Taillon, English-Montreal is showing alarmism by calling for the suspension of Article 23, which is protected by the Charter.
However, regarding the bilingualism of institutions, the school authority is leading a more “serious” debate, recalling that the rights related to language are protected. “But Quebec will respond: We haven’t changed your rights,” he predicts.
Acquired through Law 101
Furthermore, in its application, English-Montreal disputes both new elements of language reform and the achievements of Bill 101.
When the school board announced its challenge, it focused on situations that might seem deviant, such as the need for leaders of an English-language school to write to students' parents in French.
In their view, these new obligations arise from a new, more restrictive interpretation of Law 101 by the Office québécois de la langue française.
In its appeal, the EMSB also requests that English-speaking school boards no longer be required to produce “opinions, communications and printed materials intended for the public,” such as press releases posted on their websites or reports on their meetings, in French.
This is a measure that has been in effect since 1984.
The translation of certain documents, for example those of administrative boards, involves considerable costs, argues Mr. Ortona.
Advertisement
The EMSB also criticizes the obligation to report in at least both languages, which has been in force since 1977.
When school boards use signage, Ortona said, they are primarily aimed at “rights holders” who can attend primary and secondary schools in English.
“So, display, external communication, that’s what happens to our community,” he explains.
Can you share information about this story?
Write to us or call us directly at 1 800-63SCOOP.