(QUEBEC) In the wake of a legal challenge against Act 21 on state secularism, Quebec’s Attorney General Simon Jolin-Barret asked Supreme Court Justice Mahmoud Jamal to recuse himself over fear of “lack of impartiality.” The case should be investigated.”
Information, first reported DutyThe Canadian Press confirmed.
In a letter to the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Quebec’s attorney general, Justice Mahmoud Jamal, refers to when he was president of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) when he filed an appeal to the high court against the state’s law on secularism. In June 2019.
“As President of the Association, Justice Jamal was necessarily involved in some way in the preparation of this 194-paragraph procedure, whether in drafting it, amending it or simply approving its content,” we read in The Canadian. The press received a copy.
The letter also stated, “Justice Jamal will be the judge today in the case of his death, which meant deciding the constitutional questions raised by the association while he was presiding over it.”
The Canadian Press has also received letters from the Quebec Secular Movement (MLQ) and the Committee for Women’s Rights of Quebec (PDF Quebec) calling for the removal of Justice Mahmoud Jamal for Quebec reasons.
However, in a letter dated June 25, the Supreme Court has already indicated that Justice Jamal does not intend to resign. “(He) believes there are no real or justifiable conflicts of opinion that would prompt him to recant,” the letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Canadian Press, reads.
Mahmood Jamal was appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada on the 1stR July 2021. According to the Supreme Court website, he previously served as a judge on the Ontario Court of Appeal from 2019 to 2021. Before being appointed as a judge, Mr. Jamal Osler was an attorney at Hoskin & Harcourt.
Several groups, including the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, have asked the Supreme Court to reconsider the Quebec Court of Appeal’s ruling on Bill 21. The country’s top court is yet to indicate whether it is going to take up the matter or not.
The federal government has already indicated it will participate in a possible legal challenge to Bill 21 before the Supreme Court, and in Quebec, we have always pledged to protect the state’s secularism “to the end.”
The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Quebec
Last February, the Court of Appeals upheld nearly all of Bill 21, confirming that it did not violate the linguistic rights of English-speaking school boards.
The Court of Appeal confirmed that Quebec was entitled to use the override clause in a preventive manner, as it did in the case of Bill 21.
This was a significant setback for opponents of the legislation.
Law 21 prohibits public servants in positions of authority – including teachers – from wearing religious symbols such as the Muslim headscarf, Jewish kippah, Sikh turban and Christian crosses.
“Music geek. Coffee lover. Devoted food scholar. Web buff. Passionate internet guru.”
