While the split 4 – 2 – 1 decision was hardly definitive, Muslims are celebrating what they call a “landmark” ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada that rejected the call to totally ban the niqab (full face veil) in courts when Muslim women testify.
Crescent Online In its controversial decision on December 20, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a woman cannot be denied the right to wear the niqab in a courtroom trial, barring some exceptions. In a 4-2-1 ruling that was written by left wing Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, the majority of justices said that there could be no outright ban on niqab in courts when a witness testifies, but its use will have to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Two justices dissented from this view while one called for unfettered use of the niqab. Justice Louis LeBel and Justice Marshall Rothstein said it should be banned outright because it went against “the tradition that justice is public and open to all…” The dissenting judges also argued that a ban on niqab in the courtroom would convey “openness of the trial process.” This left the question unanswered as to how justice would be open to all if a niqab-clad woman were deterred from coming forward. The justices that ruled in favor of allowing the niqab raised precisely this point: banning hijab would prevent some women from coming forward, especially in sexual assault cases, from testifying in court, thereby denying them justice.
The case came before the Supreme Court because a lower court had ruled that a Muslim woman, identified only as NS, must remove her niqab while testifying in court in a trial in which she accused her uncle and cousin of sexually molesting her when she was a child. Lawyers for the defence argued that she must be forced to remove the niqab in order to determine her facial expressions while testifying. Norris Weisman, the presiding judge at the preliminary hearing in the case in 2008 insisted she must remove the niqab. He argued, based on the fact that the woman had removed her niqab to get a driver’s license as well as at airport security check, that her “religious belief is not that strong.” This decision was appealed to two higher courts before ending in the Supreme Court of Canada.
A leading Muslim lawyer, Faisal Bhabha who works for the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-CAN), interpreted the ruling as a strong endorsement that a veiled Muslim woman has “a presumptive right to maintain her religious practice.” He said the decision means “that the justice system has a duty to accommodate and that the onus will be on the other party to show that there is a ‘serious’ risk to trial fairness.” Addressing the “sincerity of belief” test, Bhabha said, “All that is required to invoke her Charter rights is a sincere belief that it is a religious duty.”
It is a Very Strong Canadian Belief , patriotically, religiously, politically, culturally, for all Canadians , to live without the islam THREATS Stated in the quran, against Canadians, Canada… NOT on Canadian soil, in our lives, around our children, in our workplaces , in govt, in laws, on our streets, in our neighborhoods
and many Islamic Threats there Are
**
Canadian Charter Rights INVOKED for millionSsssss of Canadians, Canada wide
fighting against ”the foreign facist govt of islam”
and For
the total eradication of ”the foreign facist govt of islam”’ , in Canada
STOP islam in ALL schools in Canada
close down all islamists organizations, compounds, areas, camps, mosques
INVOKED CHARTER RIGHTS FOR ALL CANADIANS
Well if she can wear a burka or whatever, then everyone else who testifies can where a head covering, including the men. This is bogus bullcrap, and you must fight fire with fire. Why should this muslim woman get any sympathy because she was raped when umpteen thousands of non-muslim women have to get on the stand and face their rapist. Muslim women are heathens, especially those demanding to wear the head covering. Bull crap all the way to hell.
Susan K. – Well Quebec should stop taking Alberta’s oil money and get off their backsides and make some monies themselves instead of pillaging the rest of Canada.
Jo, please guys, we are all on the same side here, even if you Canadians have internal squabbles.
@ Joan,,,
I have many friends in Canada, and MANY of them post on this site. We are ALL in favor of the Citizenry, as we know the strong moral fibre of your people. That said, My comment was not addressed to the people, but to the SCC, as elements of your judiciary apparently have many similarities to our own. We need to take back the Judiciary, and to ensure Integrity and honesty in the Legislative and Executive portions of the Ruling / Leadership class.
Joan, I Salute You, and your common sense. Thank you for your well-reasoned replies on this post. Blessings to you and Yours, and a Happy and Prosperous New Year !!
i’m not sure what to think. the woman involved in the rape case will no doubt later be killed as a matter of family honor win or lose with or without covering
At least the camel didn’t buy the plane tickets for the 9/11 terrorists.
‘Documents released by the FBI suggest al-Awlaki was detained and released by US authorities at least twice – and invited to dine at the Pentagon – despite evidence he had closely assisted the 9/11 plotters.’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/9781370/Radical-al-Qaeda-cleric-Anwar-al-Awlaki-purchased-plane-tickets-for-911-hijackers.html
via http://chinaconfidential.blogspot.com/2013/01/american-al-qaeda-cleric-aided-911.html
This is Canada and if new immigrants do not want to live by our laws and traditions they should consider movimg back from where they came because we can’t change our laws and traditions for freedom to suit every person who comes to our country,. Soon Canada becomes like the countries they left because of the terrible unrest .
It is difficult to speak to a person or even an animal if you only see their eyes. It is no different than a Halloween mask to disguise the person from recognition. This whole request and situation of a covered face is rediculous to say the least. To view a flower’s beauty or appearance you need more to see than just one part like the pistal or a leaf. I can’t imagine this situation to have entered into our country.
Dot Fuhrman
As a Canadian who has seen things improve here since PM Harper came to power, I want to ask you all to not give up on Canada, to not lump us in with Europe. We are fundamentally different so long as our leadership remains Conservative and even many of the Liberal Party of Canada membership see the light. The chance of Canada electing a federal socialist party like the New Democrats is becoming more and more remote by the day. So, please don’t give up on us.
This Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decision is discouraging, certainly. But many here understand it will not take long for another case involving the niqab to be appealed to the SCC. Please do not misunderstand that there are none in our justice system who can choose the case, one with better facts to support a definitive niqab ban, to appeal to the SCC. We are not without influence in our own nation.
I read the posts on Canada’s national news media, CBC, which I had to stop reading for a while after the 9/11 attacks because of its very offensive pro-shari’ah bias. But I have noticed, over recent years, that even among the very leftist users of that blog there are those who post content that reflects a general waking-up of many leftist thinkers regarding the threat of radical Islam. And even better, the CBC journalists themselves have changed direction somewhat, subtlety, but it’s a change and in the direction of opposing radical Islamist ideology. So give us a break here.
If you get a chance, take a look at some of the recent work of CBC satirists “This Hour has 22 Minutes” — they satirize all issues and lampoon all politicians and they do not spare Islam or socialism.
You must understand that part of the problem is that Saudi money Michael Coren refers to. It has bought into health care where it can be used to influence who gets good health care and who does not … think about that! And not only has Saudi money been invested in health care, it has also been invested in banking (even though shari’ah opposes interest) and insurance and the stock market so that our economy (and don’t think the USA is much different in this regard) depends on continuing good relations with some proponents of radical Islam. This is a very thorny problem that requires really good, well-thought out intelligence-based intervention that includes good law-making. But make no mistake, our Supreme Court did not issue an order that the niqab be allowed in all cases precisely because it does not misunderstand the issues and the threats of radical Islam. Our jurists are not stupid and while some may be unduly and even corruptly influenced improperly by political interests, it is true everywhere in the world that some improperly motivated individuals get elevated to positions of authority who should not be. And Rosalie Abella was appointed to the SCC for political reasons not because she has a great legal mind. Her ability to reason is impaired by her leftist bias, no doubt, but she is only one of seven and Justice Beverly McLachlin, Chief Justice of the SCC, won’t hold that position forever. And while she is openly liberal in her politics, she is not stupid and she understands the law and, unlike Justice Abella, Justice McLachlin understands the threat of radical Islam and that appeals involving the niqab are red herrings for the greater political agenda radical Islamists have to replace her job with a male shari’ah judge. Because under shari’ah, Rosalie Abella might be allowed to serve on the SCC but under no circumstances would she be allowed to argue her own ideas, mislead though they be. And while Abella may not understand that, Justice McLachlin most certainly does.
Joan, most of us in the lower 48 look with great envy toward Canada now, with your wonderful PM.
I have met Judge Abella once. She is a very pleasant woman who tries to be fair to every living creature in the world and in this case, a very typical Canadian case, her vote has brought the final judgment around to become typically Canadian (vague) avoiding direct decisions and leaving it all up to interpretation to screw up all subsequent trials that will involve that decision. What the good judge and all others have overlooked is the fact that the veils have little to do with religious observance and everything to do with Jihad. The veils are simply statements that tell us “We are at war with you and we will conquer you – Islam uber alles!”
The women who cannot go out of their homes in some countries without the -bag on their head wouldn’t claim it as a religious symbol as they -have to wear it -it is a statement of sharia -this women is under control.
The wearing of this hidious -ugly black piece of rag -offends me -and all I stand for as a free women in a democratic country – not controlled by some male dominating- political – ideology masquerading as a religion,how and why were they granted a licence to drive wearing that -mask? ,we wouldn’t be granted one wearing a balaclava -it should be banned in all civilised countries -or make the men with the -lustful eyes wear it -put them in the -bag -the men of Islam.
Dear BNI:
This Canadian case shows that the Global Jihad is just that- it is all over this planet like a disease AND IT IS SPREADING. Is a war coming between World Wide Islam and the infidel nations? There are over 50 muslim nations throughout the Mid-East, Africa and Asia. A foothold has turned into a strangle-hold in Europe.
Kosovo, Sweden, Netherlands, Russia, England, Germany… Europe is facing a totally collapse under muslim populations. Chile has a half-million Fakestinians. India has a self-destructive muslim populace. Singapore is surrounded by islamic Asia. Indonesia looms over Australia like a f-ing bomb ready to drop.
When the war comes look for there to officially to be more than the what 56(???) islamic states… as I’m afraid there will be nations that will have either islamified or have had break-away islands or provinces become seperate MUSLIM states.
Mali falls and goes 100% islamist… break-away muslim majority provinces…. we now have a South Thailand… YES! The number of “official” muslim states will soar. These will be hard-core forget about moderation enforce the sharia muslim states. The Obama legacy of Arab Springs will domino effect any remaining muslim nations into islamic hellholes.
Then when the GLOBAL tipping point happens…the colonization of parasitic muslims throughout the west will finally play out.
The Australian and New Zealand airforces abort missions to aid muslim-free Japan from imminent invasion by muslim Asia… because all hell has broke loose in Perth, Melbourne and Auckland as muslims riot. The British Royal Navy has to ignore pleas to evacuate the remaining ethnic Scandinavians in Oslo to deal with cities being taken over by muslims all over the UK.
The fakestinians whose immigrant numbers quadrupled in Chile, now have staged a military coup in this Latin American nation.
In what was once called South Africa… history repeats itself as massive concentration camps hold what remains of the Afrikaner and Afrikaans speaking Coloured population; but this time they are joined by the Indian Hindus, Chinese, Black Christians of all tribal groups and of course all ethnic whites not yet converted or executed.
Muslim leaders gather in Egypt at the mega-mosque complex where the pyramids and sphinx once stood (long since demolished) to discuss the new emerging World Wide Caliphate.
The “new” muslim government takes to the airwaves in the Philippines to announce the end of the “civil war.” While in Canada and the USA….
Read any science fiction book about global take-overs by zombies, aliens, or some other life-force sucking parasite creatures and make it 100 times worse and you have this as the world’s future under islam.
And the first steps in this war were small ones… like when the Canadian supreme court lost its mind… a couple months after the United States re-elected a muslim president for a second term.
Whenever Islam conflicts with the West, the West always bends to suit their ‘special needs’, to hell with our way of life and freedoms. If all it takes is a niqab or burka to purchase alcohol underage, to board a plane unsearched/unquestioned/ unidentified, to testify in a court of law shrouded in mystery, we have surrendered our freedom.
What an absolute disgrace to Canada, to the rights of women, to the rights of infidels. Muslims do not deserve to be here, they belong in the 7th century and should be swiftly put in their place with zero remorse, regret, or compassion. They certainly haven’t earned it and never will, a concept lost on liberals.
‘first we kill the Saturday people, then the Sunday people’. Yup, grant these inbred lunatics chomping at the bit to wipe us out more freedom to practice their ‘religion’.
Sir William Mulock, a distinguished Canadian judge, decided that the KKK’s mask was a threat.
The Islamic veil is also a threat…a threat of rape… according to Koran 33.59.
Allah says that unveiled women may be ‘molested’ (raped).
The Koran’s criminality is couched in weasel words.
THE ISLAMIC VEIL IS A THREAT.
“All that is required to invoke her Charter rights is a sincere belief that it is a religious duty.”
THAT statement blows the hell out of Justice in Canada, and any other freedom loving country. The Niqab is now a fact of life, simply by claiming “Religious Duty”
God Help You, Canada, and the rest of the Free World, such as it is !!
It’s absolutely time to do exactly what people like Mrs. Wilkins and Alain are doing on a LOCAL level – as much as possible!!!! We simply CANNOT EVER trust either our provincial or federal officials in any capacity for absolutely ANYTHING whatsoever!!!!
Also, more than ever it’s now positively CRITICAL to STOP Moslems from coming to areas where they haven’t been previously!!!! Un-Christian as it is, we have no choice on account of our self-defence but to SHUN ALL Moslems!!!! Shun their businesses, NEVER HIRE them, NEVER patronise their shops, professional-practises or anything else, EVER!!!! AND, when they appear, they need to be made so utterly unwelcome that they won’t try invading your areas!!!
But in response to ADHD, I’d like to say I don’t think shunning will be effective with the criminal interests in overrunning us. Remember it was on Christmas Day, while good little Christians were all ignoring Muslims, that the Toronto 18 met quite openly to plan their terrorist attack, including their intention to behead our Prime Minister and to bomb government buildings. No, I’m afraid we need to keep poking our noses into their affairs and insisting they either assimilate or leave.
Dear Joan:
I meant for those of us of the ordinary citizens – as long as they’re not openly doing something that REQUIRES a response!!!! OF COURSE when they do something, we MUST respond and make it very clear that we’ll not tolerate their EVIL!!!!
Furthermore, for those who are equipped like CSIS, the Armed Forces and the Police, who can therefore insinuate themselves into the enemy’s ranks and go after them: most certainly they SHOULD CONTINUE doing so – and exposing those vermin for who they are!!!! Also, every time a “liberal” lets them off the hook, it should be registered as material for such a judge, politician, civil-servant et al to be punished upon in the future!!!
Sorry for our misunderstanding each other…
It is not a fact of life in Canada. Many of us, including those outside Quebec, recognize that what the SCC did with this decision was simply to kick it back to lower courts where another case will arise that gets appealed back to the SCC where it will be debated again, with a different set of facts on which to base a different opinion, and maybe at that time, a more definitive decision will be made that can be binding on lower courts. We are NOT dhimmis here. We fight injustice.
In Québec, we’ll be working on it as soon as our National Assembly goes back to work. We plan to address this issue very seriously even if we have to prevail ourselves of the ‘notwithstanding’ clause. This is the great benefit of not having signed the Canadian constitution.
As to the rest of Canada, they’ll follow our lead eventually, like they always do.
Sanctimonious Susan. I’m from Ontario, Canada where we think for ourselves so quit the partisan hatred of Canada, please. We don’t want to weaken our national security any further with these sorts of separatist prejudices. Can’t we all just work together to oppose such stupid law instead of you calling me insulting names?