Skip all menus (access key: 2)Skip first menu (access key: 1)
Canadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personne Canadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personne Canadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personne Canadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personne
Canadian Human Rights Commission
Canadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personne
FrançaisContact UsHelpSearchCanada Site
What's NewAbout UsPublicationsFAQHome
Canadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personneCanadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personne
Canadian Human Rights Commission / Commission canadienne des droits de la personne Printable VersionPrintable Version Email This PageEmail This Page
Discrimination and Harassment
Complaints
Preventing Discrimination
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Strategic Initiatives
Research Program
Employment Equity
Pay Equity
Media Room
News Releases
Speeches
ADRS Newsletter
Email Subscription Service
Secretary General's Column
Commissioner's Messages
Legal Statement
Letter to the editor
Notices
Recent Jurisprudence
Télévision de Radio-Canada's Working Committee
In the News Recently
Case Law Information
Legislation and Policies
Proactive Disclosure
 
Need larger text?
Home Media Room Letter to the editor The Supreme Court decision regarding the kirpan

Media Room

Letter to the editor

The Supreme Court decision regarding the kirpan

Letter to the Editor of the Globe and Mail

In the column of March 13 published in the Globe and Mail under the title “The Kirpan Decision isn’t welcome in Quebec,” several issues were raised that warrant some clarification.

The column states that it is illogical to be able to bring a dagger in schools when travelers cannot board a plane with small manicure tools, even if stored in the luggage compartment, away from passengers. The Supreme Court has determined that in a school, reasonable safety, not absolute safety, is the norm, and that absolute safety would in fact undermine the universal right to a public school system. The Court also established that the context of an airplane was quite different from that of a school.
 
With respect to the possibility that a kirpan could be stolen by another student and used as a weapon, the Court determined that, with all the restrictions now imposed, it would be more difficult for a student to try to steal a kirpan than to find another dangerous tool within the school grounds.

The Court reiterated that accommodation must be taken seriously and that all efforts must be made to fully understand the situation and the associated risks before rejecting particular accommodation. It also made it clear that a practice can be forbidden or suspended if it precludes an appropriate level of safety or any other objective essential to a free and democratic society.  This decision does not automatically apply to other circumstances, even if the issues appear similar. The Supreme Court only ruled on the case brought before it.

Robert W. Ward

Secretary General
Canadian Human Rights Commission

Highlights
Innovative Change Management
More...
Appointment of New Secretary General
More...
Notice of Vacancy - Chief Commissioner
More...
Videoclip - Duty to Accommodate
More...
Email Alerts
Register to receive email notifications when new information is posted on the website.
More...
Search
Français | Contact Us | Help | Search
Canada Site | What's New | About Us | Publications | FAQ | Home