New face-covering law does irreparable harm, lawyer says

Quebec’s controversial face-covering law was tested for the first time before the courts on Friday as opponents argued for a temporary suspension of a key section of the legislation.

Marie-Michelle Lacoste, a Quebec woman who wears the veil, the National Council of Canadian Muslims and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association launched the challenge last week, asking for a temporary suspension of the section of the law that requires an uncovered face when giving or receiving public services.

Lawyer Catherine McKenzie, representing the plaintiffs, argued the section of the law violates charter rights to equality and freedom of religion.

McKenzie argued the matter is urgent, given the significant impact on Muslim women who wear the veil on a daily basis.

She added the damages to those women would be irreparable.

The ban came into effect in October and extends to attending class in Quebec’s public educational institutions or boarding public transit in the province, although people can don the face coverings again once they have shown identification on the bus or subway.

Two women who wear the full veil said in sworn statements that they fear having to remove the veil to receive government services.

One said she uses only the métro to get around because she dreads how bus drivers will react.

Both say aggressive behaviour and insults have increased since the law came into effect.

While the law calls for accommodation in certain cases, those provisions aren’t in force like the rest of the law.

The provincial government’s lawyer, Éric Cantin, argued there’s a presumption that any law adopted by the government is in the public’s interest.

And, he argued, the plaintiffs didn’t present enough evidence to refute this presumption.

Cantin also argued that the evidence of discrimination was weak.

The women only presented their “fears,” he argued. According to their declarations, they’re able to get the same services the same way as before, Cantin said.

Outside the court following the hearing, Lacoste, the plaintiff who wears the veil, said Cantin “doesn’t know what he’s talking about. I invite him to step into my shoes for a week.”