Home ● Services ● Experience ● Articles ● Quicklaw Articles ● Book Review ●Publications ● Work in Progress ● The Media ● Link Sites ● Contact ● Your Suggestions
LEGAL DIVERSITY IN ACTION
January 25th, 2000
I was in court to witness the trial of Dudley Laws (the head of the Black Action Defence Committee), when Justice Arthur Whealey of the General Division Court (now Superior Court of Justice) removed from the court an individual who was wearing some form of head gear under the pretext that that head gear did not represent a recognized religion. The individual was tossed out screaming and protesting.
Years later, on January 19th, 2000, I just happened to be in courtroom 407 in Scarborough representing a client when the Crown suddenly objected to an individual appearing before the court with what visibly appeared to be a Rastafarian head gear. The Crown called it a hat. The man calmly stated that he was not wearing a hat.
The man’s lawyer rose to tell the presiding Justice of the Peace that his client hailed from the Rastafarian religious faith. My attention was directed to the presiding Justice of the Peace who was clad in Sikh religious headgear. I thought to myself: “There is no better place in Canada or anywhere at this particular moment to observe legal and religious diversity-in-action than this place.” Is the Justice of the Peace going to play a “Whealy” - exclude this man because his head gear was not a “known” religious belonging or was he going to implement religious diversity-in-action?
The Sikhs had to go all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada to be allowed to wear their religious symbols even while being members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (R.C.M.P.). Does this Sikh Justice of the Peace even know about that case in the Supreme Court of Canada? Does he care? Now that his religion has been accepted, does he care about the religious beliefs of other minorities?
The Whealy incident was initially reported to the Human Rights Commission who turned it down on jurisdictional grounds. It is now before the Federal Court of Canada. At the dawn of the 21st century with Toronto as religiously, racially and culturally diverse as it is, should we have to go to court to assert this very religious, racial and cultural diversity? When the courts are involved because the politicians do nothing, elites in mainstream society then beret the courts for getting involved in these very matters. Where should minorities turn to then? The fact is, we should involve anyone. It should be a matter of course that religious, racial and cultural diversity should be allowed to blossom unfettered.
The Justice of the Peace came to the rescue. He calmly stated that the man before him was wearing religious attire and let the proceedings continue. This represented to me, legal and religious diversity-in-action.
The recent appointments of two women to the highest posts in Canada of Governor-General and Chief Justice of Canada were hailed as a triumph of diversity and equality. For religious, racial and cultural minorities in Canada, such lofty ideals are still like a pie in the sky.
Member Of:
Criminal Lawyers Association The Law Society Of Upper Canada
Last Modified: August 7, 2007
Home
●
Services
●
Experience
●
Articles
●
Quicklaw Articles
●
Book Review
●
Publications
●Work
in Progress
●
The Media
●
Link Sites
●
Contact●Your
Suggestions
Copyright @ 2005 by C&H