As the Legault government prepares to use Bill 96, a controversial piece of legislation that would reform Bill 101 to strengthen mechanisms for protecting the French language, opponents are preparing their weapons for a challenge. And they can count on the help of lawyer Julius Gray.
It is a law that has no reason to existimmediately launched the defender of individual freedoms for more than 40 years, Monday, into the microphone of All one morning.
I Julius Gray intends to participate in the legal battle against Bill 96, which is called to be the Law relating to the official and common language of Quebec, French, reported on Monday The Press. The constitutionalist, who had previously challenged several clauses of Quebec’s French language Charter, adopted in 1977, did not specify how he would participate in this file.
Me Gray judges that the project piloted by the Minister of Justice and responsible for the French language, Simon Jolin-Barrette, is quite simple strayingbecause it was based on a false foundation: that the French language was threatened in the province.
” It is aberrant to pass legislation on the wrong premise [que] The French are in danger. “
Far from agreeing with this opinion, Prime Minister François Legault recently reiterated that the provisions reinforced by this reform of Bill 101 are reasonable and it is also a matter of safety.
However, according to Me Gray, statistics do not show a decline in the French language in Quebec. The government and some advocates prefer its bill, such as Frédéric Lacroix’s essay to choose the data that organizes them to pretend to be in dangersuggested by the lawyer.
This is the case with home language statistics, he gave as an example. Honestly, French does better than when I was younger, [quand] all the posters were in English and the immigrants attended English schooldescribed in Me Gray.
Of the three main elements that the lawyer considers problematic, the first is the use of beyond the clause of the Canadian Constitution, otherwise known as despite the clause which the government chose to include in the project to avoid possible legal action.
This clause, which was also used by the Legault government in the context of the enactment of Act 21 on State secularism, came into being. violates fundamental rights moaned Me Julius Gray on the airwaves of the ICI Première.
On the other hand, limiting the services that can be provided in a language other than French would contribute, in his view, to categorize citizens, meaning those who will have access to the full service and those who will not. An idea that Prime Minister Legault removed last week, ensuring the bill has no impact on services provided to health establishments in the province.
Mr. Gray also criticized Bill 96’s proposals aimed at the justice system, specifically the need to provide a French version of a judicial decision written in English. immediately and without delay.
We will return to the idea of a unilingual justice system presented in the first Bill 101 and which, fortunately, was broken.said the lawyer, who predicts that the same scenario is likely to be repeated in this provision of Bill 96.
More than 40 years after the challenges to the French Charter, Julius Gray recognizes the success of Bill 101, which he considers necessary today. Some [la] qualify as failure [mais] I support this law, as amendedhe said.
However, Bill 96 – which is likely to be adopted by the National Assembly, the CAQ enjoying adequate support – is unlikely to be profitable, according to constitutional experts. There is no reason to reduce services, limit individual rights, and above all, to pass a constitutional amendment whose scope no one understands.he summarized.
Source: Radio-Canada
