Swatting at Human Rights Violations

"People in countries overseas where religious freedom is being violated are being imprisoned, tortured, killed because of their faith."
"In Canada, we have the courts. We have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. ... We can advance religious freedom overseas because we enjoy it in Canada. So that's the approach that I take.
"Canada is very consistent in having a one-China policy.
"In my interactions that I've had with Tibetan Buddhists, or Uighur Muslims in Canada ... I always focus on the religious freedom aspect.
"Were not getting into discussions about various autonomy claims that those groups might be making ... I'm the religious freedom guy."
"You're seeing the situation in certain countries where the Christian population is being wiped out."
Andrew Bennett, Canadian ambassador for religious freedom

Mr. Bennett was in Washington when he made those statements in an interview, where he took part also in a panel discussion with a colleague from the U.S. Commission on International and Religious Freedom. A panel discussion that had been organized by the Berkeley Center's Religious Freedom Project. Too bad he missed the sixth annual Summit for Human Rights and Democracy hosted by UN Watch, taking place in Geneva. But no one can be everywhere at once.

And in Washington, Mr. Bennett had the opportunity to meet with the Dalai Lama, also visiting there, and being received formally by U.S. President Barack Obama, much to the fury of Beijing. With the Dalai Lama Mr. Bennett discussed the constraints met by Tibetan Buddhists to practise their faith. Beijing, famously, accuses the Dalai Lama of the cardinal sin in China of "splitism", wishing to take Tibet out of China.

China insists Tibet is part of China, and with the military might to assert and back up that claim Tibet is in no position to insist otherwise, though they have attempted repeatedly, to do just that. Beijing responds by connecting Tibet to China by a costly rail link, second to none in the world of transport technology, and by flooding Tibet with Han Chinese, so that possession is nine-tenths of any law; the international community has no wish to confront China, and neither has the Dalai Lama. Lives depend on it.

Daramsala/AsiaNews

While in Turkey, when he raised concerns about the security and freedoms to practise their religion of Turkish Christian, Jewish and Alevi minorities last fall, his queries were not taken too kindly in a country known for its repression and human rights abuses, not only of religious minorities, but the autonomy-declaring Kurd demographic, and the long-suffering journalists who face arrest and jail time. They've latterly been joined by Turkish military elite, police and jurists.

Opposition protests have intensified in Istanbul and other cities as the government struggles with a corruption scandal [AFP]

The Turkish response might have been predictable, much as Iran berates Canada for its purportedly poor treatment of 'immigrants' and First Nations peoples. Well, said the Turkish interlocutors, what about Quebec? Mr. Bennett was somewhat stymied on that one, not authorized to speak of domestic issues where the offending, impending Quebec legislation would bar people wearing hijabs, turbans, yarmulkes and ostentatious religious symbols from working in the public sector.

He did point out, however, that there is little comparison between a repressive human-rights-abusing regime that persecutes its minorities and a country where the law of the land is paramount in protecting the equal rights and freedoms of all its citizens, irrespective of religious diversity; that very religious diversity itself is uncompromisingly protected under Canadian law.

During the forum organized by the Berkley Center, Mr. Bennett pointed out his pride in being named, a neutral, non-partisan civil servant, with his mandate and his office as Canadian ambassador for religious freedom, placed within the larger mandate of that of the Department of Foreign Affairs, making his job one of great importance to Canada. Clarifying when questioned that the Conservative-led government has stated repeatedly its willingness to disagree with major allies rather than compromise its moral ideals.

His experience in Turkey, he pointed out, represented the only instance when a foreign official had raised the issue of charter freedoms and human rights with him since taking up his post.

Much Ado

When news of the PQ government in Quebec's intention to pass a law became public, the backlash was immediate from the rest of Canada. The Parti Quebecois' proposed Charter of Quebec Values, Bill 60, had critics furiously suggesting that the PQ was embarking on a severely socially divisive path to creating an apartheid society of sorts. Those who embraced Quebec's secularist charter were the in group, those who flaunted their religiosity too prominently were definitely out.

Out, that is, from employment in any capacity by the provincial government. This would impact schools at all levels, including universities, child care institutions, hospitals, the judiciary, the police; government workers generally, in an all-encompassing sweep cleansing those representing the provincial government authority at any level of their untidy habit of wearing conspicuous religious symbols.

Examples were given of a turban, an oversized cross or Star of David, a kippa, and Muslim head or face covering of any design, clearly identifying the wearer with the religion they worshipped. As an affront, or a kind of waiver on the civil code of sartorial conduct. A gross intolerance in a pluralist, basically tolerant society that has learned to accept visible differences between people of various cultures and religions.

The predictions were that Quebecers, sensible and sensitive to injustice as they are, would never agree to such a draconian law, insulting to the cosmopolitan nature of people living in the province. Of course, such a law might find agreement in the backwoods of Quebec, in the largely rural areas, and certainly any such outside Montreal and Quebec City. The PQ would be forced to retreat, tail between their legs.

Pauline Marois smiled serenely and Democratic Institutes Minister Bernard Drainville politely but firmly denied that the proposed Charter would in any manner demean anyone; it was meant to support the province's secular values and that was that. The choice could be made; if employment with a provincially-funded body was valuable to the worker, they could see fit to set aside their religious identification during the working day.

Democratic Institutions Minister Bernard Drainville, right, has said the charter’s ban religious articles is ‘an essential and inescapable condition of the bill.’  (Jacques Boissinot/THE CANADIAN PRESS)

 

Demonstrators marched in defiance of Bill 60, wearing the offending symbols lest anyone doubt their commitment to upholding freedom of expression, association and religion, cherished Canadian values guranteed in law by the Canadian Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And the studied response of the PQ to the ferocious push-back was not to withdraw, but to reconsider and tighten the bill even more.

After all the furor it now appears that the hugely unpopular secessionist government has suddenly found itself in majority territory should an election be called anytime soon. A recent Leger poll put the PQ ahead of the Liberals, 36% to 33%, 43-25% among francophones. Almost half of all Quebecers -- 48% -- support the bill, translating to 57% francophone support and 18% among Quebec's linguistic minorities.

The ban on religious symbols attracts greater support at 60% overall, with 69% among francophones, a hefty increase since September. And here's another bit of a surprise, while support for the bill is high outside cities, it is almost as high in Quebec City and Montreal. As for the opposition parties, they haven't completely separated themselves from the bill or the religious clothing ban.

In fact, the most sensible recommendation is that of the Liberals who had years earlier commissioned the Bouchard-Taylor commission on "reasonable accommodation", which had come back with the recommendation that police and judges, those in positions of authority not wear religious identification in the commission of their public duties.

Party Leader Philippe Couillard suggested his party would permit public servants to wear the kippa and the hijab, excluding the burka and the niqab, both face coverings. Sounds like a sensible resolution of a highly-explosive social engineering situation certain, if brought into law as is, to face a dwindling ethnic population exiting the province, and a challenge under the federal Charter.

But in fact, social conformity in a secular society's public face giving service to its population seems like a no-brainer. Canadian values and customs are those of the majority. Canada is not a particularly religious country, even though it is a majority Christian country. At one time there were nuns who dressed in religious costume; they too have, like Quebec's loosening of its Catholic roots, adapted to a secular appearance.